A.M. No. P-94-1080, P-95-1128, P-95-1144

Case Summary (A.M. No. P-94-1080, P-95-1128, P-95-1144)

Factual Background

On 14 September 1994, Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce, Clerk of Court of RTC-Roxas City, reported alleged falsification of Daily Time Records (DTRs) by stenographers Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches, and alleged tolerance of that practice by their Branch Clerk, Atty. Esperanza Isabel E. Poco-Deslate. On 12 September 1994 twenty-four RTC-Roxas City employees petitioned for investigation and preventive suspension of Atty. Mendoza-Arce alleging oppression and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. On 16 September 1994 Dinah Christina A. Amane, Clerk III, Branch 19, filed a formal complaint directly with the Court against Atty. Mendoza-Arce for oppression and related charges. On 12 October 1994 Atty. Poco-Deslate filed a countercharge against Atty. Mendoza-Arce, and on 2 December 1994 Atty. Mendoza-Arce formalized complaints against Duran, Arches, and Poco-Deslate for falsification and connivance.

Early Attempts at Resolution and Referral

Executive Judge Sergio L. Pestano attempted mediation beginning 21 September 1994 with all RTC-Roxas City judges but failed to reconcile the parties. The file was initially referred to Judge Pestano, who inhibited himself to avoid suspicion of partiality. The matters were reassigned to Executive Judge Julius L. Abela of RTC-Mambusao, Capiz for investigation, report and recommendation.

Investigating Judge’s Findings and Recommendations

After extensive hearings Investigating Judge Abela submitted a Confidential Investigation Report dated 13 May 1997. In Adm. Matter No. P-94-1080 he recommended dismissal of Amane's complaint against Atty. Mendoza-Arce for lack of proof of the specific acts of oppression alleged by Amane; but he found Amane guilty of falsification of her DTRs and of notorious absenteeism and recommended her dismissal. He recommended six months suspension for Atty. Poco-Deslate for tolerating Amane’s absences. In Adm. Matter No. P-95-1128 Judge Abela found the charges of falsification against Duran and Arches and the charge of connivance against Poco-Deslate to be without factual basis and recommended dismissal of those charges. In Adm. Matter No. P-95-1144 he found Atty. Mendoza-Arce guilty of grave misconduct, oppression, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and recommended her dismissal.

Evidentiary Bases Found by the Investigating Judge

Judge Abela credited multiple indicia of falsification by Amane, including her failure to deny absences on specified dates, absence of initials on certifications she should have initialed, testimony showing her presence elsewhere during office hours, unrebutted testimony of Atty. Mendoza-Arce concerning observed absences, and stark contrasts between Amane’s 1994 DTR entries and later bundy clock records. As to Duran and Arches, Judge Abela relied on certifications and grading sheets from the Colegio de la Purisima Concepcion, professor statements, and affirmations by Executive Judge Pestano showing that the students’ classes had been arranged after office hours and that the stenographers were not known to leave before 5:00 p.m., thus undermining proof of falsification. Judge Abela also found numerous instances where Atty. Mendoza-Arce had allegedly harassed or intimidated employees and third parties, publicly aired accusations over the radio, threatened professors with court action to obtain certifications, and acted beyond the supervisory scope prescribed by the Manual for Clerks of Court.

Supreme Court’s Review and Adoption of Findings

The Court carefully reviewed the Investigation Report and adopted its factual findings and recommendations substantially in toto. The Court sustained the finding that Dinah Christina A. Amane committed falsification of DTRs and notorious absenteeism and that Atty. Esperanza E. Poco-Deslate, as immediate supervisor, failed to discipline Amane. The Court accepted the Investigating Judge’s conclusion that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the charges of falsification against Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches, and that the charge of connivance against Atty. Poco-Deslate must therefore fail. The Court further agreed that Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce committed grave misconduct, oppression, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service by her intimidatory and abusive methods in pursuit of evidence and by publicly airing her accusations.

Legal Basis for Liability and Penalties

The Court relied on Rule XVII, Sec. 4, of the Civil Service Law and Rules, which makes falsification of time records administratively punishable and on Sec. 23, par. (f), Rule XIV, Omnibus Civil Service Rules and Regulations, which prescribes dismissal for falsification of official documents even for the first offense. The Court emphasized the duty of court employees and lawyers to observe prudence, restraint, courtesy and dignity, citing Canon I, Code of Professional Responsibility and the Court’s precedents such as Macalua v. Tiu, Jr. and Security Division, Supreme Court vs. Umpa, to underscore that public officers must avoid conduct that degrades the judiciary. The Court also invoked Chapter VII, Sec. 5, Manual for Clerks of Court to hold that the Clerk of Court may initiate investigations and recommend action but does not have authority to usurp the disciplinary power of the Presiding Judge; the Court noted Executive Judge Pestano’s supervisory role and criticized Atty. Mendoza-Arce’s disregard of that authority.

Disposition and Sanctions

The Court ordered as follows: In Adm. Matter No. P-94-1080 the complaint of Dinah Christina A. Amane against Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. Dinah Christina A. Amane was found guilty of notorious absenteeism and falsification of her DTRs and was dismissed from the service with forfeiture of all benefits and with prejudice to reemployment in the government including government-owned and controlled corporations. Atty. Esperanza E. Poco-Deslate was adjudged guilty of simple neglect of duty for tolerating Amane’s absences and was fined P10,000.00 in lieu of suspension because she had since assumed office as Third Assistant Provincial Prosecutor. In Adm. Matter No. P-95-1128 the charges of falsification against Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches were dismissed for lack of merit, and the connivance charge against Atty. Poco-Deslate was dismissed. In Adm. Matter No. P-95-1144 Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce was fo

Case Syllabus (A.M. No. P-94-1080, P-95-1128, P-95-1144)

Parties and Procedural Posture

Dinah Christina A. Amane filed Adm. Matter No. P-94-1080 charging Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce with conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, disgraceful conduct, and oppression.
Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce filed Adm. Matter No. P-95-1128 accusing Anita B. Duran, Johnel C. Arches, and Atty. Esperanza Isabel E. Poco-Deslate of falsification of Daily Time Records (DTRs) and connivance.
Atty. Esperanza Isabel E. Poco-Deslate filed Adm. Matter No. P-95-1144 as counterclaimant against Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce for grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, intentional falsity, and oppression.
The three administrative matters were consolidated by the Court by Resolution dated 21 June 1995 and by subsequent consolidation on 16 October 1995 with Adm. Matter No. P-94-1080.
The matters were initially referred to Executive Judge Sergio L. Pestano for investigation and mediation, but he inhibited and the cases were reassigned to Executive Judge Julius L. Abela as Investigating Judge.
Investigating Judge Abela submitted a Confidential Investigation Report dated 13 May 1997, and the Court thereafter reviewed the record and rendered a per curiam decision.

Key Factual Allegations

Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce alleged that stenographers Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches falsified their DTRs for June, July and August 1994 by indicating a five o'clock departure while actually leaving earlier to attend 4:30 p.m. classes.
Twenty-four employees of the RTC-Roxas City filed a petition dated 12 September 1994 accusing Atty. Mendoza-Arce of oppression, emotional instability, usurpation of judicial functions, red tape, public harassment, and conduct creating low morale.
Dinah Christina A. Amane alleged that Atty. Mendoza-Arce compelled uniforms, reviewed and returned DTRs, laid traps to catch absences, and publicly insulted and shouted at staff.
Atty. Poco-Deslate countercharged that Atty. Mendoza-Arce maliciously accused personnel, abused investigatory powers, demanded improper certifications from school authorities, and usurped authority over discipline and investigations.
Additional factual allegations included use of local radio broadcasts and police blotter entries by Atty. Mendoza-Arce to publicize accusations, threats to professors and witnesses at the Colegio de la Purisima Concepcion, inducement of affidavits, close monitoring by a bundy clock, and repeated fault-finding and intimidation.

Evidence Received

The record contained affidavits and a petition signed by twenty-four employees, DTRs, annexes to Atty. Arce's comment, certificates of enrollment from the Colegio de la Purisima Concepcion, grading sheets, machine copies, testimonies of professors and college officials, certification by Executive Judge Sergio L. Pestano, and police blotter entries.
The Investigating Judge considered comparative DTR entries, failure to initial certifications as required by office procedure, testimony of coworkers, and bundy clock entries for different periods.
The Court received the Investigating Judge's Confidential Investigation Report and supporting documentary and testimonial exhibits submitted during extensive hearings.

Issues Presented

Whether Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce committed grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and oppression warranting dismissal.
Whether Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches falsified their DTRs as charged by Atty. Mendoza-Arce.
Whether Dinah Christina A. Amane falsified her DTRs and committed notorious absenteeism warranting dismissal.
Whether Atty. Esperanza E. Poco-Deslate was guilty of neglect of duty or connivance in the alleged falsifications.
What sanctions, if any, are appropriate for each respondent consistent with applicable civil service rules and ethical standards.

Investigating Judge's Findings

The Investigating Judge recommended dismissal of Atty. Arce's complaint in Adm. Matter No. P-94-1080 for failure to prove specific oppressive acts alleged by Amane.
The Investigating Judge found Dinah Christina A. Amane guilty of falsification and notorious absenteeism and recommended dismissal from the service based on combined evidentiary circumstances.
The Investigating Judge recommended suspension of Atty. Poco-Deslate for six months for tolerating Amane's absences and falsification as immediate superior.
The Investigating Judge recommended dismissal of the charges against Anita B. Duran and Johnel C. Arches in Adm. Matter No. P-95-1128 for lack of factual basis.
The Investigating Judge recommended that Atty. Susan Mendoza-Arce be dismissed for grave misconduct, conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, and oppression after crediting numerous complaints of intimidation, usurpation of authority, public a