Case Summary (A.M. No. 07-8-27-SC)
Applicable Laws and Background
The primary legal framework referenced is Section 42 of Batas Pambansa (BP) 129, which stipulates that Justices and Judges are entitled to a monthly longevity pay equivalent to 5% of their basic salary for every five years of continuous and meritorious service in the judiciary. Additionally, Administrative Circular No. 58-2003, which allows for the tacking of earned leave credits to lengthen judicial service for the purpose of calculating longevity pay, provides the legal basis for the queries raised.
Background of the Case
The context for the issue arises from Justice Garcia's impending compulsory retirement on October 19, 2007, after which he would like to include his earned leave credits, totaling approximately 1,500 days, in the computation of his longevity pay, increasing it from 30% to 36%. The FMBO's computations for Justices Garcia and Dacudao did not include these leave credits, prompting both officials to seek clarification.
Prior Administrative Circular and Precedents
The case references a previous Resolution regarding Senior Associate Justice Josue N. Bellosillo, who sought the inclusion of earned leave credits similar to the requests made by Justices Garcia and Dacudao. This led to the establishment of Administrative Circular No. 58-2003, which was envisioned to allow such tacking, reinforcing the liberal interpretation of retirement laws to benefit retirees.
Court’s Affirmation on Inclusion of Leave Credits
The Court noted the necessity to include earned leave credits in the computation of longevity pay as unresolved situations emerged due to prior refusals by the Department of Budget and Management (DBM) to accommodate these provisions. This reflected a broader narrative that the law should favor retired Justices and Judges, underpinning the humanitarian goal of providing for their sustenance and comfort post-retirement.
DBM’s Position and Court Rebuttal
The Department of Budget and Management posited that Section 42 requires continuous service and stressed that earned leave credits should not count as such, posing a challenge to the implementation of A.C. No. 58-2003. The Court dismissed this argument, asserting the clarity of its directives regarding the inclusion of leave credits in longevity pay calculation.
Court’s Directive to DBM
The Supreme Court concluded that the DBM is mandated to comply with A.C. No. 58-2003 and to ensure the longevity pay for Justices and Judges incorporates their total earned le
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. 07-8-27-SC)
Overview of the Case
- The case concerns requests from Justices and Judges regarding the computation of Longevity Pay upon their compulsory retirement.
- Specifically, the issue at hand is whether earned leave credits should be included in this computation.
- Communications addressing this issue were received from Hon. Cancio C. Garcia, Associate Justice, and Corazon G. Ferrer-Flores, Deputy Clerk of Court and Chief of Office, Fiscal Management and Budget Office (FMBO).
Background and Context
- Justice Garcia, with over 45 years of government service, requested clarification on the tacking of his earned leave credits to his years of judicial service to compute Longevity Pay.
- Under Section 42 of Batas Pambansa 129, Justices and Judges are entitled to a monthly Longevity Pay equivalent to 5% of their basic pay for every five years of continuous service in the judiciary.
- Justice Garcia's earned leave credits amounted to 1,499.5 days, equating to over 5 years of service, which he wished to include in his total years of service for Longevity Pay.
Administrative Circular No. 58-2003
- In 2003, the Supreme Court issued Administrative Ci