Case Summary (A.M. No. P-09-2603)
Administrative Complaint
On June 26, 2008, Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño referred a report to the Office of the Court Administrator regarding Mr. Marcos, who was allegedly frequently absent without proper authorization. The report elaborated on instances of absences, indicating that his absence days greatly surpassed the maximum allowable leave according to law. The Chief of Office authorized the filing of an administrative complaint against Marcos, requiring him to provide a comment on the allegations.
Respondent’s Defense
In his comment dated August 11, 2008, Mr. Marcos attributed his absences primarily to an accident that occurred on October 31, 2004, which he claimed resulted in a fractured left foot that incapacitated him for approximately three months. He asserted that his supervisor’s hostility, stemming from a grievance he raised against her, contributed to his absenteeism. Utilizing medical documents, he contended that he had submitted valid evidence regarding his health status, though faced challenges in the processing of his sick leave application.
Evidence Evaluation
The evaluation of evidence conducted by Dr. Ramon S. Armedilla from the Supreme Court Medical and Dental Services concluded that Mr. Marcos' application for sick leave for the period of January to April 2005 should be disapproved due to the lack of substantial proof supporting his claimed incapacity. The absence of X-ray evidence corroborating his initial medical complaints led to doubts regarding the legitimacy of his claimed disability. Marcos, however, alleged that the required medical documents were misplaced during the leave application process.
Findings of the Court Administrator
In a subsequent report on December 16, 2008, the Court Administrator underscored the excessive nature of Marcos' unapproved absences, describing them as unauthorized and in direct violation of the Civil Service Circular No. 30, Series of 1989. The report indicated that his absence records from the years 2005 to 2008 demonstrated a consistent pattern of neglect, with specific figures showing 65 days of absence in 2005, and upwards of 130 days in subsequent years. The Court Administrator emphasized the detrimental impact of such absenteeism on public service and recommended dismissal as a suitable penalty for Marcos' actions.
Sanctions for Habitual Absenteeism
According to the Civil Service Commission's Memorandum Circular No. 04, series of 1991, habitual absenteeism is defined as incurring unauthorized absences that exceed certain limits over specified time frames. The sanctions for such violations escalate, prescribing suspension
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. P-09-2603)
Case Identification
- Case Citation: 650 Phil. 251 EN BANC
- Administrative Matter Number: A.M. No. P-09-2603 (Formerly A.M. No. 08-7-221-MeTC)
- Decision Date: November 23, 2010
Background of the Case
- A letter dated June 26, 2008, from Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño prompted an investigation into the habitual absenteeism of Nelson G. Marcos, Sheriff III of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Caloocan City.
- The investigation was based on a report from the Leave Division of the Office of Administrative Services, detailing Marcos' unauthorized absences from 2005 to 2008, which were significantly above the allowable limits.
Allegations and Responses
- The report indicated that Marcos had numerous unauthorized absences, which exceeded the legal allowances.
- In his defense, Marcos cited a serious injury from an accident on October 31, 2004, which he claimed incapacitated him for three months.
- He alleged that his absences were also due to a hostile work environment stemming from grievances against his supervisor, Atty. Monalisa Buencamino.
Medical Evidence and Claims
- Marcos submitted a medical report from Dr. Ramon S. Armedilla, which disapproved his sick leave application for January to April 2005 due to lack of supporting medical evidence, specifically missing X-rays.
- Dr. Armedilla stated that the evidence did not support a diagnosis of a fracture, leading to the disapproval of his sick leave request.
- Marcos countered that he had submitted the required X-ray films, which he believed had been misplaced.