Title
Bandong vs. Ching
Case
A.M. No. P-95-1161
Decision Date
Aug 23, 1996
Court interpreter Bella R. Ching suspended for habitual neglect of duty over 10 years for failing to prepare court session minutes; Clerk of Court Atty. Bandong required to explain supervisory lapses.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.M. No. P-95-1161)

Facts:

Background of the Case

  • Executive Judge Henry B. Basilla of Branch 49 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Cataingan, Masbate, issued Memorandum No. 7 on 13 July 1995. This memorandum directed Atty. Jesus N. Bandong, Clerk of Court VI, to conduct an inventory of all cases from 1985 to 1995 and report on cases lacking minutes of court sessions or proceedings.

Findings of Atty. Bandong

  • On 19 July 1995, Atty. Bandong submitted a letter-report to Judge Basilla. The report listed 67 criminal cases and 11 civil and other cases where no minutes of sessions or hearings from 1985 to 1995 were prepared and attached to the records by the Court Interpreter, Bella R. Ching. A total of 281 sessions or hearings lacked minutes.
  • Atty. Bandong recommended that Ching’s salary be withheld for her failure to perform her duties.

Submission to the Office of the Court Administrator

  • Judge Basilla forwarded Atty. Bandong’s letter-report to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) on the same day, recommending that Ching be fined and her salaries withheld.

Court’s Initial Action

  • On 18 October 1995, the Supreme Court approved the OCA’s recommendation to treat the letter-report as a complaint against Ching. Ching was directed to file an answer and show cause why she should not be disciplined. Her salaries were withheld until she submitted the missing minutes.

Ching’s Defense

  • In her answer, Ching claimed that she had already prepared, submitted, and attached all the minutes to the records, as evidenced by Atty. Bandong’s certification and Judge Basilla’s 1st Indorsement dated 23 October 1995.
  • She also argued that some minutes were not prepared because she was on leave during certain hearings, and the interpreter-designate should have prepared them. Additionally, she claimed that some minutes she prepared were wrongly attached to other cases by the Court Aide.

Atty. Bandong’s Reply

  • Atty. Bandong submitted a reply, stating that he was submitting the case for resolution based on his letter-report.

OCA’s Memorandum

  • The OCA found Ching guilty of simple neglect of duty for failing to prepare and attach minutes of court sessions and proceedings dating back to 1985. The OCA noted that Ching only submitted the minutes on 23 October 1995.
  • The OCA recommended a fine of P3,000.00 and the release of Ching’s withheld salaries, considering it was her first administrative offense and there were mitigating circumstances.

Issue:

  1. Whether Bella R. Ching is guilty of neglect of duty for failing to prepare and attach minutes of court sessions and proceedings.
  2. Whether the penalty recommended by the OCA is appropriate given the circumstances of the case.
  3. Whether Atty. Jesus N. Bandong, as Clerk of Court, should also be held accountable for failing to supervise Ching’s performance.

Ruling:

  • The Supreme Court found Bella R. Ching guilty of habitual neglect of duty, not simple neglect, due to the prolonged period of her failure to prepare and attach minutes of court sessions and proceedings.
  • The Court imposed a one-month suspension without pay, considering it was her first administrative offense, she had already submitted the missing minutes, and her salaries had been withheld.
  • The Court also required Atty. Jesus N. Bandong to show cause why he should not be disciplined for his failure to supervise Ching’s performance.

Ratio:

  1. Neglect of Duty: The Court emphasized that Ching’s failure to prepare and attach minutes of court sessions and proceedings over a period of ten years constituted habitual neglect of duty. This was not a simple oversight but a prolonged dereliction of her responsibilities.
  2. Importance of Minutes: The Court highlighted the significance of minutes as a crucial record of court proceedings. Minutes provide a summary of events, including the date, time, attendees, and actions taken during a session, making them essential for the proper administration of justice.
  3. Public Accountability: The Court reiterated that public office is a public trust, and all government employees, regardless of rank, must perform their duties with diligence and integrity. Neglect of duty, especially in the judiciary, undermines public trust in the administration of justice.
  4. Mitigating Circumstances: While the Court acknowledged mitigating factors, such as Ching’s immediate compliance in submitting the missing minutes and the withholding of her salaries, it found that a suspension was more appropriate than a fine due to the gravity of her neglect.
  5. Supervisory Responsibility: The Court noted that Atty. Bandong, as Clerk of Court, failed in his duty to supervise Ching’s performance. Clerks of Court are responsible for ensuring that court records are properly maintained and that subordinates perform their duties effectively.

Conclusion:

  • The Supreme Court suspended Bella R. Ching for one month without pay for habitual neglect of duty. Her withheld salaries and fringe benefits were ordered to be released.
  • Atty. Jesus N. Bandong was required to show cause why he should not be disciplined for his failure to supervise Ching’s performance.


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.