EN BANC
[A.M. No. 98-12-377-RTC. July 26, 1999]
RE: CASES LEFT UNDECIDED BY JUDGE SEGUNDO B. CATRAL, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 8, APARRI, CAGAYAN.
R E S O L U T I O N
QUISUMBING, J.:
Judge Segundo B. Catral was the
presiding judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 8, at Aparri, Cagayan. He retired from the service effective March
25, 1998. Attached to his application
for optional retirement was a certification issued by Avelino John A. Jucar,
officer-in-charge of Branch 8 at that time, stating that there is no case
pending decision or resolution in Judge Catral's sala.
Upon inquiry by the Office of the
Court Administrator, however, Celia P. Sotto, the present officer-in-charge of
Branch 8, informed the OCA that seven cases remained undecided by Judge Catral.
With this information, the Court
issued on December 15, 1998, a resolution requiring Jucar to explain why he
certified that there were no cases pending decision or resolution in Judge
Catral's sala prior to his retirement.
In his explanation dated February 10, 1999, Jucar said that judge Catral
went to his residence on the evening of March 8, 1998, and asked him to sign a
prepared certification stating that no case had been left pending decision or
resolution in the latter's sala.
According to Jucar, Judge Catral informed him that he is going to Manila
that same night to submit his retirement papers, including the
certification. Judge Catral told Jucar
that he was able to finish all cases submitted for decision or resolution in
his sala. Without any means of
immediately verifying the truth of Judge Catral's assertion, Jucar accepted the
former's allegation and signed the certification. Jucar stated in his explanation that he did not intend to mislead
the Court in signing the certification and prayed for the dismissal of the
administrative case which had consequently been filed against him and Judge
Catral.
The matter was referred to the OCA
for evaluation, report and recommendation in a resolution issued by the Court
on March 2, 1999.
The OCA found Jucar's explanation
unsatisfactory, particularly since as branch OIC, he -- like a branch clerk of
court -- should have known whether or not there were cases pending decision or
resolution at the time Judge Catral filed his application for optional
retirement. He should have exercised
due care in signing the certification to avoid compromising the integrity of
his position.
Hence, the OCA recommended that
Jucar be admonished.
As for Judge Catral, the OCA found
that four of the seven cases, although submitted for decision, were still
within the 90-day period to decide required by law. Another case was delayed due to a pending amicable settlement by
the parties. Thus, there were only two
cases which were left pending decision upon Judge Catral's retirement, which he
failed to decide within the reglementary period. The OCA recommended that Judge Catral be fined in the amount of
P5,000.00.
After a thorough review of this
case, the Court is in accord with the recommendations of the OCA as regards
Judge Catral, who should have been more forthright in his dealings with the
Office of the Court Administrator. His
patent dishonesty in submitting a false certification is an offense that cannot
simply be overlooked. We believe that
imposing a fine as penalty is appropriate under the circumstances.
However, the Court finds OCA's
recommendation to admonish Jucar unacceptable.
It is too lenient a sanction for his misconduct. Jucar should have been more circumspect in
his actions. As an officer of the
court, his responsibility is to the court and not to any person constituting
it. He is as liable as Judge Catral is,
with regard to the submission of the false certification to the OCA. Both connived to mislead that office. Without Jucar's participation, the dishonest
act would not have been possible. This
being so, a fine similar to that imposed on Judge Catral would be more
appropriate, rather than a mere admonition, in impressing upon Jucar the
gravity of his deed.
WHEREFORE, Judge Segundo B. Catral, former presiding judge of
the Regional Trial Court, Branch 8, Aparri, Cagayan is fined in the amount of
P5,000.00, to be deducted from any retirement or other benefits which may be
due him, for his failure to decide within the 90-day period mandated by law the
following cases: Civil Case No. 08-290
and Civil Case No. 08-221, and for filing a false certificate with the Office
of the Court Administrator. Avelino
John A. Jucar, Jr., former Legal Researcher and OIC of the regional Trial
Court, Branch 8, Aparri, Cagayan[1] is likewise fined in the amount of P5,000.00 for
participating with Judge Catral in preparing and filing a false certificate
with the Office of the Court Administrator.
SO ORDERED.
Romero, Bellosillo, Melo, Puno,
Vitug, Kapunan, Mendoza, Panganiban, Purisima, Pardo, Buena, Gonzaga-Reyes, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.
Davide, Jr., C.J., on official leave.