Case Digest (A.M. No. P-94-1071)
Facts:
In the case of Elizabeth Asumbrado vs. Francisco R. Macuno, Jr., the complainant, Elizabeth Asumbrado, filed a letter-complaint on September 16, 1993, against Francisco R. Macuno, Jr., who served as a Sheriff at the Regional Trial Court of Agusan del Sur, Branch 7. The complaint alleged that Macuno engaged in dishonesty by falsifying his daily time record for December 1992. Specifically, it was claimed that he falsely indicated his presence in court on December 9, 21, 22, and 23, despite being absent on those dates. In response, Macuno denied the allegations, asserting that he was indeed present at work on the specified dates, as corroborated by his immediate supervisor, Judge Zenaida P. Placer. The case was referred to Executive Judge Evangeline S. Yuipco for investigation on September 28, 1994. In her Investigation Report dated April 10, 1995, Judge Yuipco concluded that Macuno's signature was absent from the court's attendance logbook for the dates in question, and...
Case Digest (A.M. No. P-94-1071)
Facts:
- Complaint Details: Elizabeth Asumbrado filed a letter-complaint on September 16, 1993, alleging that Francisco R. Macuno, Jr., a Sheriff at the Regional Trial Court of Agusan del Sur, Branch 7, falsified his daily time record for December 1992. Specifically, he falsely recorded his presence on December 9, 21, 22, and 23, when he was actually absent.
- Respondent’s Defense: Macuno denied the allegations, claiming he reported for work on those dates, with his immediate supervisor, Judge Zenaida P. Placer, certifying his attendance.
- Investigation: The case was referred to Executive Judge Evangeline S. Yuipco for investigation. Her report dated April 10, 1995 found:
- Macuno’s signature was absent in the attendance logbook for the disputed dates.
- He failed to rebut Clerk III Perfecto S. Calamba’s certification of his absence.
- Despite Judge Placer’s approval of his daily time record, Macuno committed falsification.
- His actions constituted grave misconduct, gross dishonesty, and conduct prejudicial to public service.
- Respondent’s Background: Macuno had 33 years of faithful public service and was nearing retirement. This was his first and only infraction.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- (Unlock)
Ratio:
- Integrity in Public Service: The Court emphasized that public service requires utmost integrity and strict discipline. Public servants must exhibit honesty and accountability, especially in the judiciary.
- Severity of Falsification: Falsification of public documents warrants the maximum administrative penalty, including dismissal and forfeiture of benefits, as stated in Mirano v. Saavedra.
- Humane Disposition: While the Court upholds integrity, it also considers realities such as the respondent’s long service and impending retirement. Forfeiture of benefits would leave him with nothing in his twilight years, making a fine a more realistic and humane option.