Title
Supreme Court
IN RE: Rabang III
Case
A.M. No. 07-9-214-MTCC
Decision Date
Jul 26, 2011
Judge Rabang dismissed for gross misconduct, abandonment of office, and unauthorized absences; benefits forfeited, position declared vacant.

Case Summary (A.M. No. 07-9-214-MTCC)

Application for Indefinite Leave

On May 16, 2007, Judge Rabang submitted an application for indefinite leave and travel abroad. However, Executive Judge Indar deferred action on this application due to ambiguities regarding the type and duration of the leave, as well as Judge Rabang's prior unauthorized absences from April to May 2007. Judge Rabang had returned to work only on April 11, 2007, after having taken a two-month leave earlier.

Court Actions and Resolutions

On October 10, 2007, the Supreme Court issued a resolution requiring Judge Rabang to explain his noncompliance with Memorandum Order No. 14-2000, which forbids judges from leaving the country without permission. This resolution disapproved his application for indefinite leave and classified his absences as unauthorized, ordering him to return to work immediately, or risk being removed from service.

Investigation of Absences

By October 24, 2008, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) reported that Judge Rabang’s residence appeared abandoned. Attempts to communicate the October 10 resolution were met with difficulty, as Judge Rabang was not reachable. A subsequent investigation by the National Bureau of Investigation indicated that Judge Rabang had relocated to Canada around the time of his initial leave application, living there without notifying the court.

Findings of the Office of the Court Administrator

A February 15, 2011 memorandum from the OCA revealed Judge Rabang had been absent from his position for over three years. It asserted that his departure from the Philippines occurred without court authorization, leading to a determination that he had abandoned his duties. The OCA recommended the dismissal of Judge Rabang for gross misconduct and abandonment of his office, along with the forfeiture of certain benefits and barring his re-employment in government roles.

Legal Framework on Absenteeism

Under Section 8, Rule 140, gross misconduct may merit penalties including dismissal. Previous cases established a threshold for habitual absenteeism, with decisions emphasizing the importance of a judge’s presence for the prompt administration of justice. In Judge Rabang's case, his unauthorized absence for over four years constituted gross misconduct, justifying severe punitive measures.

Judicial Conduct Standards

The Code of Judicial Conduct mandates punctuality and diligence in a ju

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.