ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[A.M. No. OCA IPI 97-245-P.November 17,1999]

BARBERO vs. MILLAN

SECOND DIVISION

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated NOV 17, 1999.

A.M. No. OCA IPI 97-245-P(EsteIa V. Barbero vs. Carmelita Millan.)

Acting on the Report dated 25 January 1999 of Judge Alberto V. Benesa, Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Bangued, Abra, Br. 2, and Acting Presiding Judge of Br. 1, in compliance with our Resolution of 2 December 1998, the Court Resolves to sustain the recommendation therein contained; consequently, the instant complaint is dismissed.

According to the investigating Judge, subpoenas were duly served on Mayor Martin Alagao, his supposed bodyguard "Orly," and Bobby Bisquera, as well as on Merla Ruiz of Radio DZPA, Fiscal Carlos Barbero (husband of complainant Atty. Estela Barbero, now deceased), respondent Carmelita Millan, and Clerk of Court Raul Ramos for their appearance at the hearing on 13 January 1999 at 8:30 in the morning. All those issued subpoenas appeared, except Bobby Bisquera.

Fiscal Carlos Barbero testified that if it were true that respondent Carmelita Millan merely received the complaint and immediately turned it over (together with the copies thereof) to the Clerk of Court and denied that she lent them to Mayor Martin Alagao, then somebody else must have brought them out from the court without observing the procedure prescribed in the Rules of Court.

According to Clerk of Court Raul Ramos, the complaint for concubinage was officially filed at 3:00 o'clock in the afternoon of 16 December 1998 (should be 1996) and extra copies were kept in a separate folder and placed in the drawer of respondent who was the receiving clerk. The drawer however had no lock. The original copy was placed in a cabinet which was provided with a lock. While as Clerk of Court he had supervision over the court records, the keys to the cabinets were inside respondent's drawer and whenever anyone needed a particular file he would get the keys from her drawer. Ultimately, the two (2) places were the subject complaint (and the extra copies) were filed - the cabinet with a lock and the drawer of respondent which had no lock - were free and accessible to anyone in the courtroom.

When questioned Mayor Alagao and his bodyguard Orlando "Orly" Marquez denied knowing respondent and having any hand in the photocopying of the concubinage complaint.

As for respondent, while she admitted that she received the complaint she denied having furnished anyone with a copy thereof for reproduction. She stated that the drawer where the extra copies of the complaint were kept could not be secured since its lock was destroyed. She denied any participation in the reprinting of the complaint.

Judge Benesa could not find any evidence that would link respondent to the photocopying despite earnest efforts. Consequently, he believes that the Court may be barking at the wrong tree after noting the comment of Fiscal Barbero virtually clearing respondent of any wrongdoing. The investigating Judge concludes that his efforts have unearthed nothing but possibilities and conjectures with no definitive finding as to who brought out the court records for duplication and dissemination "granting that it was indeed a record of the court that was actually copied." He therefore recommends that the case be "dismissed, even for the peace of mind and equanimity of the bereaved husband x x x himself."

We agree. Much as we too would like to dig deeper into the matter, there is not much with which to go on by way of establishing the culpability of respondent for the supposed dissemination of the concubinage case through the unauthorized reproduction of the complaint and other pertinent Court records. The administrative complaint seeks to remove respondent from her post in the Municipal Trial Court of Bangued, Abra, as she, allegedly, "does not deserve to be a government employee." But, it is axiomatic that before a civil servant may be dismissed from the service it is mandatory that her alleged misconduct be proved with substantial evidence. In the instant case, this quantum of proof has not been demonstrated.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

(Sgd.) TOMASITA B. MAGAY-DRIS

Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE