Case Summary (A.M. No. P-15-3322)

Introduction

This document is a resolution by the Supreme Court regarding an administrative complaint filed against Mr. Romar Q. Molina, a Clerk III at the Regional Trial Court in Baguio City, for alleged violations of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel.

Complaint Overview

• Filing Date: November 3, 2010
• Complainant: Atty. Gail M. Bacbac-Del Isen, Clerk of Court V
• Respondent: Romar Q. Molina, Clerk III
• Allegation: Violation of Republic Act No. 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act) for soliciting money from a bondsman.

Factual Background

• Incident Reported: On October 20, 2010, Ms. Marie Rose Victoria C. Delson reported that Molina solicited P3,000 to facilitate the release of accused Consuelo Romero.
• Testimony: Ms. Delson confirmed giving P3,000 based on Molina's assurance of expedited processing.
• Confrontation: A confrontation on January 19, 2011, led to allegations of harassment against both parties.

Investigation Process

• OCA Involvement: The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) intervened and sought comments from the respondent, which were delayed and ultimately unsatisfactory.
• Executive Judge's Report: On December 7, 2012, the Executive Judge found sufficient evidence against Molina, confirming solicitation of funds.

Legal Violations

• Code of Conduct for Court Personnel:
  • Canon I: Prohibits court personnel from using their positions for unwarranted benefits.
  • Canon III, Section 2(b): Forbids receiving tips or remuneration for assisting parties in judicial processes.
• Consequences for Violations: Grave misconduct is defined as serious transgressions that undermine the integrity of the judicial system.

Court Findings

• Evidence Evaluation: The Court found Ms. Delson's testimony credible, which contradicted Molina's general denials.
• Grave Misconduct Determination: The Court confirmed Molina's solicitation constituted grave misconduct under civil service rules.
• Penalties Recommended:
  • Initial Recommendation: One-year suspension.
  • Final Ruling: Dismissal from service with forfeiture of all benefits except accrued leave credits, and disqualification from future government employment.

Key Penalties

• Dismissal from Service: Immediate termination with forfeiture of retirement benefits.
• Disqualification: Permanent ineligibility for employment in any government entity.

Key Takeaways

• The Supreme Court upheld the findings that Romar Q. Molina engaged in corrupt practices by soliciting money in exchange for facilitating judicial processes.
• The resolution emphasizes the stric...continue reading

Case Syllabus (A.M. No. P-15-3322)

Origin of the Case

• This administrative matter arose from a verified Complaint filed on November 3, 2010, by Atty. Gail M. Bacbac-Del Isen, Clerk of Court V at the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Baguio City, Branch 3.
• The complainant charged Mr. Romar Q. Molina, Clerk III at the same RTC, with a violation of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 3019, known as the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.

Allegations Against the Respondent

• On October 20, 2010, the complainant received information from Ms. Marie Rose Victoria C. Delson, a bondsman associated with UCPB General Insurance Company, Inc., alleging an illicit activity involving the respondent.
• Ms. Delson's affidavit stated that the respondent solicited money to facilitate the temporary release of Mr. Consuelo Romero, an accused in Criminal Case No. 23502-R, pending before the RTC.
• Respondent allegedly requested P3,000 from Ms. Delson, saying, “Para mas madali ilakad magbigay ka ng three thousand pesos (P3,000).”
• Ms. Delson admitted paying this amount but later demanded its return when no effort was made to expedite the release of the accused.

Respondent's Actions and Delays

• The respondent claimed to have returned the P3,000 to Ms. Delson in installments from July to August 2010.
• Prior to this incident, rumors had circulated that the respondent had been soliciting money from bondsmen and clients under similar pretenses.
• Following the complaint, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) indorsed it to the respondent for comment on December 21, 2010. Respondent requested an extension, which was granted until F...continue reading