A.M. No. RTJ-08-2140 - Office of the Court Administrator vs. Amor

A Memorandum dated November 23, 1999, was filed by Acting Presiding Judge Manuel E. Contreras of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Paracale, Camarines Norte on behalf of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA).
The complaint accused Executive Judge Owen B. Amor of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Daet, Camarines Norte of Grave Abuse of Authority, Grave Misconduct, and Acts Inimical to Judicial Service.

On October 1, 1999, respondent impounded the tricycle of Gervin Ojeda at the Hall of Justice of Daet, Camarines Norte when Ojeda could not pay for damages incurred after bumping into the respondent’s vehicle.
The impounding was duly recorded in the Guardas Logbook.
A certification was issued by Security Guard Virginia Morico; however, it was mistakenly dated October 11, 1999 instead of November 11, 1999.
Upon noticing the error, Judge Contreras flagged the mistake to SG Morico, who then proceeded to respondent’s chambers, behaved in an abelligerent and discourteous manner, and refused to return the certification.
Efforts by Judge Contreras to retrieve the certification—including seeking assistance from Judge Sancho Dames and 2nd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Leo Intia—proved futile.
Subsequently, Judge Contreras learned that respondent berated the guards (including SG Morico and Head Guard Quintin Fernandez) in an apparent effort to conceal the abuse of authority.

During the latter part of October 1999, Acting Presiding Judge Rosita Lalwani of the MTC of Mercedes, Camarines Norte summoned respondent to consider reassigning her to another station.
Respondent berated Judge Lalwani, accusing her of laziness and likening her to other judges from Camarines Sur detailed at Camarines Norte.
He further instructed her to delay the trial of a case (BP 22) on the ground of personal connections with the accused.

On October 27, 1999, under the pretext of a judicial visit, respondent visited Judge Contreras in his chambers.
Respondent intervened for Atty. Freddie Venida, who had been arrested and charged with indirect contempt for failing to appear in three criminal cases.
He justified his intervention by mentioning that he did not mind Atty. Venida’s abusive legal practice in return for receiving “gold,” referencing the abundant gold in Paracale.
Following Judge Contreras’s rejection of his overtures, respondent publicly denounced Judge Contreras in open court as an “abusive judge” for persecuting Atty. Venida.

Lawyers, prosecutors, and litigants lodged complaints about respondent’s habitual absence, especially on Mondays and Fridays.
This absenteeism resulted in delays in the disposition of cases, contrary to existing laws and circulars on speedy trial.

Upon assuming office as Executive Judge, respondent ordered Clerk of Court Atty. Perfecto Loria to submit all petitions for extra-judicial foreclosures for his scrutiny.
These orders caused delays in proceedings, particularly for petitions requiring publication upon filing.
Respondent further instructed Atty. Loria to demand extra “grace money” from newspaper publishers under the threat of being blacklisted.
Atty. Loria ultimately refused to comply with these directives.

The OCA received a Report (Memorandum dated February 3, 2000) and a series of Resolutions were issued:

A Resolution dated February 28, 2000, treating Judge Contreras’s Memorandum as an administrative complaint, requiring respondent’s comment.
A subsequent Resolution dated July 2, 2001, ordered respondent to show cause why he should not face disciplinary action or be held in contempt for failing to respond.
Another Resolution dated January 30, 2008, referred the matter back to the OCA for further evaluation.

Respondent’s filing of his Certificate of Candidacy (COC) for the 2002 Barangay Elections led to his automatic resignation effective June 7, 2002.

In a Memorandum dated July 25, 2008, the OCA found respondent administratively liable for:

The OCA determined that respondent’s failure to file a comment on the administrative complaint, despite repeated opportunities, amounted to an implied admission of the allegations.
The OCA also noted that respondent’s filing of a COC and subsequent resignation were a deliberate ploy to evade administrative liability.
Based on these findings, the OCA recommended:

Re-docketing the case as a regular administrative matter;
Forfeiture of respondent’s retirement benefits; and
Perpetual disqualification from reinstatement or appointment in any public office, including government-owned and controlled corporations.

Whether respondent, Executive Judge Owen B. Amor, should be held administratively liable for:

Whether respondent’s automatic resignation after filing a Certificate of Candidacy for the 2002 Barangay Elections divests the Court of its jurisdiction to determine his administrative liability.

Whether respondent’s failure to file a comment on the administrative complaint constitutes an implied admission of guilt.