Case Summary (A.M. No. 19-08-19-CA)
Background of the Case
On September 30, 2009, the Court of Appeals rendered a decision in the Tabuada case, with the original records thereafter transferred to the Archives Unit of the Judicial Records Section (JRS) on January 9, 2010. Multiple individuals were involved in the handling and safekeeping of these records, ultimately assigning them to the contractual employee, Eleazer "Randy" Canoneo. However, by January 2014, during an inventory, it was discovered that the original records were missing, leading to several attempts over the years to locate them.
Investigation and Findings
An investigation was initiated by Fernando C. Prieto regarding the missing records which revealed a lack of adherence to protocols for the safekeeping of court documents. A thorough examination by Atty. Wong-Ruste concluded that Mario C. Agura exhibited negligence in his duties as head of the Archives Unit, primarily due to his failure to establish a secure and effective workflow regarding document custodianship.
Negligence and Responsibilities
Agura's responsibilities included ensuring the safekeeping and proper accounting of all records. Atty. Wong-Ruste found that the index card system was inadequately maintained and that the safekeeping area was unsecure. Agura was particularly criticized for not reporting the missing records immediately and for conducting follow-ups with a lackadaisical approach. This failure in supervision and delay in locating the missing records contributed to the inability to reconstitute them in a timely manner.
Legal Implications and Penalties
The investigation found Agura guilty of simple neglect of duty, defined as a lack of attention to responsibilities due to carelessness or indifference. While the penalty for this could range from one month and one day to six months of suspension, considering the context of Agura’s position, the court adjusted the penalty to a fine equivalent to three months' salary. The decision emphasized that court personnel are bound to perform t
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. 19-08-19-CA)
Background of the Case
- The case revolves around the missing original records of the Tabuada case (CA-G.R. CV No. 01293).
- The initial decision in the case was rendered by the Court of Appeals, Visayas Station on September 30, 2009.
- The records were turned over to the Archives Unit of the Judicial Records Section (JRS) on January 9, 2010.
- Rossie A. Maceda, a stenographer, and Voltaire Matildo, Clerk II, were involved in receiving, docketing, and encoding these records.
- The records were placed in a specified location within the archives for safekeeping.
Discovery of Missing Records
- The records were discovered missing during an inventory conducted by Anthony F. Delima III in January 2014.
- Delima, upon instructing to look for the records due to a request from a litigant's representative in June 2016, found that the records could not be located.
- Subsequent inquiries led to the realization that the records had been missing since at least 2016, raising concerns about the handling and tracking of court records.
Investigation Process
- An Incident Report was filed by Fernando C. Prieto, prompting further investigations and explanations from personnel involved in the Archives Unit.
- Mario C. Agura, Head of the Archives Unit, provided explanations regarding the procedures followed and the lack of recorded transfers or inquiri