G.R. No. 2789 - Johnson vs. David

On September 30, 2009, the CA-Visayas rendered a decision in the Tabuada case, penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan with two concurring justices.
On January 9, 2010, at 2:45 p.m., the original records of the Tabuada case were turned over by the Office of the Ponente to the Archives Unit of the Judicial Records Section (JRS) of CA-Visayas.
Rossie A. Maceda, a stenographer in the Archives Unit, received the original records and passed them to Voltaire Matildo, Clerk II, for docketing and encoding into the record management system.
Eleazer “Randy” Canoneo, a contractual employee, subsequently took custody for safekeeping and prepared an index card indicating the case number, parties, ponente, and the precise location of the records (Shelf: 15; Row: 5; Right Column).

Sometime in January 2014, Anthony F. Delima III, then Court Aid II assigned to assist in monitoring record movements, discovered during an inventory that the original records of the Tabuada case were missing from their designated shelf.
Upon noticing the missing records, Delima immediately informed Mario C. Agura, Head of the Archives Unit.
Years later, in June 2016, when a litigant’s representative requested a copy of the records via phone call, efforts were made to locate the documents. However, Delima could not produce them, and subsequent inquiries confirmed that the records were missing.

After the discovery, Agura initiated inquiries to determine whether the records had been inadvertently moved, transferred, or even remanded to a lower court.
Agura submitted an explanation alleging that the records might have been relocated due to inactivity or a lack of requests for access, and he mentioned that no transfers were recorded in the logbook.
Further attempts were made by supervisory personnel such as Abdul M. Amer, Head of the JRS, who communicated with the requesting party and instructed Delima to secure a copy, only to face additional delays and a lack of positive results.
On April 17, 2018, Mr. Fernando C. Prieto, Chief of the Judicial Records Division, directed Agura and other concerned personnel to submit their explanations regarding the record’s disappearance, prompting a detailed inquiry.

On June 27, 2019, Atty. Maria Consuela Aissa P. Wong-Ruste, Assistant Clerk of Court and Investigating Officer, submitted her Report and Recommendation on the loss of the Tabuada case records.
The report highlighted several lapses:

The existence of an index card for record tracking was rendered ineffective due to non-updating.
The process allowed any employee to pull out records without proper oversight.
The safekeeping area was unsecured, with keys left accessible and a lack of a proper logbook for key usage.
There was no periodic, effective inventory to ensure the accountability of the records.

Atty. Wong-Ruste concluded that Agura, as the head of the Archives Unit, was negligent for failing to secure an efficient workflow and for not immediately reporting the missing records.

Whether Mario C. Agura should be held administratively liable for the loss of the original records of the Tabuada case due to simple neglect of duty.
Whether his justification—that the records might have been inadvertently relocated or misplaced—adequately excuses his failure to secure and account for the records.

Whether the lack of an updated index/logbook and the unsecured safekeeping area contributed significantly to the loss, and if Agura’s failure to supervise his subordinate personnel properly constitutes negligence.

Whether the imposition of a penalty (suspension or fine) is justified based on the administrative and procedural lapses exhibited, including delays in initiating remedial measures once the records were found missing.