Title
Supreme Court
Jaravata vs. Orencia
Case
A.M. No. P-12-3035
Decision Date
Jun 13, 2012
A judge filed a complaint against a clerk of court for disrespect, intoxication, and negligence; the clerk was fined post-retirement for misconduct.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 194168)

Allegations and Incidents

On April 7, 2011, Judge Jaravata submitted a formal complaint to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), asserting that on February 18, 2011, Orencia entered her chambers while intoxicated and made disrespectful comments. This incident followed a pattern of perceived indifference by Orencia towards his duties, evidenced by his absence during a court session on December 10, 2010, and delays in processing case records.

Details of the Incident

During the incident, after a court session had concluded, Orencia approached Judge Jaravata in the corridor, presented her with a diary as a gift, and admitted to having attended a social event. Upon noticing his intoxication, Jaravata expressed her concern for his behavior, leading Orencia to respond aggressively, making disparaging remarks about her intentions regarding his employment. This confrontation took place in the presence of litigants and other court personnel, further exacerbating the disrespect shown.

Judge Jaravata’s Complaint and Response

Judge Jaravata's complaint details the derogatory remarks made by Orencia, including threats regarding her position as a judge, which were perceived as deeply unprofessional and damaging to the court's integrity. She also criticized the internal security for failing to maintain safety protocols. Orencia countered the claims, asserting that he was not heavily intoxicated and had been polite prior to the incident. He attributed his reaction to Judge Jaravata's smoking and alleged unreasonable behavior.

Findings of the Office of the Court Administrator

The OCA conducted a review of the incident and recommended that Orencia be reprimanded and fined ₱3,000. According to Section 2, Canon IV of the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel, court personnel are required to perform their duties courteously and professionally. The OCA emphasized the importance of public trust in the judiciary and reaffirmed that any actions undermining this trust are unacceptable.

Rationale for Decision

The OCA's recommendation was based on the clear evidence of Orencia's disrespectful conduct and the resultant negative impact on the court’s environment. The determination classified discourtesy during official duties as a light offense, meriting a reprimand for a first-time violation. Additional factors considered included Orencia’s admission of mistakes, his long service in the judiciary, and the fact that the incident was his first offense.

Conclusions on Conduct and Accountability

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.