Case Summary (A.M. No. P-17-3746)
Applicable Law
The case is adjudicated under the provisions of the 1987 Philippine Constitution and relevant rules regarding administrative misconduct and financial accountability, specifically involving public officers tasked with handling financial records and transactions.
Audit Findings and Misconduct
The audit, conducted from November 22, 2015, to October 21, 2016, unearthed multiple discrepancies in the amounts collected and reported by the MTCC for various funds, namely the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and the Special Allowance for the Judiciary Fund (SAJF). Specifically, the findings indicated extensive tampering of official receipts to obscure true financial transactions, with substantial variances detected amounting to over P5 million. This was attributed to the actions of Macaldo and Veraque, who admitted to modifying receipts to underreport amounts collected and misrepresent transaction dates.
Admission of Guilt and Restitution
On December 4, 2015, Macaldo executed an affidavit admitting her involvement in the financial discrepancies, revealing that funds were misallocated for personal use. Veraque subsequently restated her accountability by restituting sizeable amounts totaling P550,000.00 for JDF and SAJF between December 2015 and September 2016. Both were held jointly responsible for the remaining shortages, equating to over P4 million.
Recommendations from the Audit Team
The audit team recommended severe administrative penalties against Macaldo and Veraque, suggesting their dismissal for acts of dishonesty and gross misconduct, hindering the proper management of judiciary funds. They were also directed to make restitution for the funds misappropriated. Teves, while not directly implicated in the tampering, was recommended for suspension based on failures in supervisory responsibilities.
Rationale for Penalties
The court categorized both Macaldo and Veraque's actions as grave misconduct due to their willful deceit and violation of their fiduciary duties as court employees. Teves was found liable for simple neglect of duty for her inadequate oversight, leading to the successful execution of the fraudulent activities. In determining guilt,
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. P-17-3746)
Case Overview
- The case pertains to an administrative matter addressing the financial audit conducted at the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Cebu City.
- The audit revealed significant discrepancies in the financial transactions handled by court personnel, leading to charges of dishonesty and misconduct.
Audit Background
- Audit Observation Memorandum No. 15-001, dated October 16, 2015, highlighted that not all collections were deposited on time.
- A financial audit was conducted from November 22, 2015, to October 21, 2016, covering the period of multiple clerks of court.
Objectives of the Audit
- Assess the accuracy and regularity of cash transactions.
- Ensure all judiciary fund collections were deposited promptly.
- Verify the compliance of filing fees with the Amended Administrative Circular No. 35-2004.
- Assist the Clerk of Court in proper bookkeeping and accounting of court funds.
Findings of the Audit
- Discrepancies were identified in the amounts collected versus reported in the official cashbook and receipts.
- Alterations and erasures were found on the official receipts, particularly for the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) and the Special Allowance for the Jud