Case Digest (A.M. OCA IPI No. 08-127-CA-J)
Facts:
Re: Letter-Complaint of Atty. Ariel Samson C. Cayetuna, et al. v. Associate Justice Michael P. Elbinias, A.M. OCA IPI No. 08-127-CA-J (January 11, 2011; reported 654 Phil. 207; 107 OG No. 46, 5864, promulgated November 14, 2011), Supreme Court En Banc, Velasco Jr., J., writing for the Court.The complainants — Atty. Ariel Samson C. Cayetuna, Cathy D. Cardino, Cynthia Y. Jamero, Grace L. Yulo, Ken Rinehart V. Sur, driver Roderick Roxas, and utility worker Alfonso Abugho — were confidential employees in the Office of Associate Justice Michael P. Elbinias at the Court of Appeals (CA) – Mindanao Station in Cagayan de Oro. The matter began when a litigant in CA-G.R. SP No. 01580 (Algabre v. RTC, Branch 15, Davao City) sent a February 6, 2008 letter to the Presidential Action Center (PAC) seeking assistance; that letter was routed to the CA and ultimately reached Justice Elbinias in April 2008.
Justice Elbinias assigned Atty. Cayetuna to draft a reply to the petitioner and asked that Cayetuna sign the reply while the justice would note it. Cayetuna refused and on April 24, 2008 sent Justice Elbinias a letter explaining his refusal; that same day Justice Elbinias sent a termination letter to the CA Personnel Officer effecting Cayetuna’s dismissal. When RATA and salaries were released on April 25, 2008, Cayetuna did not receive pay for the second half of April and was told he would be excluded from certain benefits. In solidarity, the other employees submitted an unverified letter-complaint dated April 30, 2008 to the Court charging Justice Elbinias with multiple administrative offenses and requesting his dismissal, preventive suspension, security from reprisal, and acceptance of their resignations without the justice’s approval.
The CA Presiding Justice recommended acceptance of the employees’ resignations on May 6–9, 2008, and the Court approved them. Complainants sent an additional unverified letter dated June 18, 2008 (received July 3, 2008) amplifying allegations — including alleged antedated termination of Jamero, refusal to sign clearances, and alleged interference with their prospective reemployment — and again sought preventive suspension.
Justice Elbinias filed a Comment (July 13, 2008) denying the charges, explaining the exercise of administrative discretion regarding TROs and case dispositions, justifying his actions concerning DTRs and clearances, and alleging some employees abandoned the office and that records went missing. He later filed a Supplemental Comment (Sept. 15, 2008) explaining an ongoing inventory of records as the reason for unsigned clearances and denying admissions alleged by complainants. Other CA employees and local bodies later submitted letters of support and commendation for Justice Elbinias (2009).
The Supreme Court required parties to state whether they would submit the case on the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- May the Court proceed on and sustain unverified letter-complaints by treating them as anonymous complaints where the complainants failed to submit verified complaints or affidavits?
- Were the substantive allegations against Associate Justice Michael P. Elbinias (gross inefficiency, bribe solicitation, drinking liquor on premises, personal use of government property, falsification of DTR, disrespect to fellow justices, oppression, and grave abuse of authority) sufficiently proven to warrant administrative sanction?
- Was the termination of Atty. Cayetuna wrongful or otherwise ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)