Title
Re: Judicial Audit Conducted in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 54, Lapu-Lapu City
Case
A.M No. 05-8-539-RTC
Decision Date
Nov 11, 2005
Judicial audit revealed Judge Fernandez's gross inefficiency in resolving cases and Atty. Pacas's delayed reports; fines and warnings imposed.

Case Summary (A.M No. 05-8-539-RTC)

Findings from the Judicial Audit

The judicial audit revealed substantial inefficiencies within Branch 54, reporting 456 pending civil cases and 456 pending criminal cases—totaling 962 cases. The audit indicated that only 24 cases had been submitted for decision, with 24 cases still having pending incidents for resolution. Alarmingly, 112 cases were categorized as "dormant," indicating a lack of action over a considerable duration. Moreover, four of the submitted cases were already overdue for decision, and resolutions for pending incidents in 15 other cases were similarly overdue.

Respondent Judge's Obligations

Following the audit findings, Senior Deputy Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño issued a memorandum urging Judge Fernandez to submit written explanations for his delays. Specifically, he was directed to:

  1. Explain the failure to decide on four overdue cases before retirement.
  2. Resolve the fifteen pending incidents before his retirement.
  3. Address 110 cases lacking action and to take appropriate measures including the cancellation of forfeitures of bail bonds in eleven criminal cases.

Compliance and Explanations Given

In his response dated May 20, 2005, Fernandez reported that he had resolved all criminal cases pending decision, while also addressing issues regarding bail bonds. He requested additional time to finalize two remaining civil cases and reported on the submission of the pending docket inventories. The Judge attributed his delays to the overwhelming number of cases and limited resources.

Additional Responses and Accountability

On May 23, 2005, Atty. Denis L. Pacas, the Branch Clerk of Court, also provided a response, claiming that his delays in reporting were due to the complications of managing multiple responsibilities and adjusting to the demands of his position since assuming office in March 2004.

Recommendations and Conclusion of the OCA

Despite the explanations provided, the OCA deemed them unsatisfactory in a memorandum dated August 22, 2005. They recommended treating this matter as an administrative complaint against both Judge Fernandez for gross inefficiency and Atty. Pacas for the violation of administrative circulars. The OCA proposed a fine of P20,000 for Judge Fernandez, to be deducted from his retirement benefits, and admonishment for Atty. Pacas, with a warning against future infractions.

Court's Rationale and Judgment

The Court affirmed the OCA's conclusions noting that the failures of Judge Fernandez to decide cases within the mandated periods violated Article VIII, Section 15(1) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which stipulates timeframes for the resolution of cases. They reiterated that delays compromise public trust in the judiciary and that judges must demonstrate diligence and professional competence at all times. Although consideration must be given to genuine requests for extensions, the Court noted that Judge Fernandez did not seek such remedies.

Sanctions and Fut

...continue reading

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