A.M. No. 00-1-48-RTC - Report on the Judicial Audit Conducted in the RTC-Branch 20, Manila

Case Summary (A.M. No. 00-1-48-RTC)

Administrative Complaint Against Judge Quijano

An administrative complaint was lodged against Judge Virgilio D. Quijano of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 20 in Manila, citing his failure to resolve multiple civil cases within the mandated 90-day period. The complaint highlighted not only the delays in decision-making but also the lack of action on several other cases over an extended timeframe. The Supreme Court concurred with the Office of the Court Administrator's (OCA) findings, holding Judge Quijano accountable for his inaction and failure to comply with the legal requirements for timely case resolution.

Administrative complaint filed against Judge Quijano.
Allegations of failure to resolve cases within the 90-day period.
Supreme Court agrees with OCA's findings of liability.

Constitutional and Ethical Obligations of Judges

The Supreme Court emphasized that the Constitution mandates all lower courts to resolve cases within three months from submission. Additionally, Rule 3.05 of Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to dispose of court business promptly. The Court reiterated that judges must adhere to the 90-day decision-making period unless granted an extension, underscoring the importance of judicial efficiency and accountability.

Constitution mandates resolution of cases within three months.
Rule 3.05 of the Code of Judicial Conduct requires prompt case disposal.
Judges must adhere to the 90-day period unless granted additional time.

Findings from the Judicial Audit

A Judicial Audit conducted by the OCA revealed that Judge Quijano failed to resolve eight civil cases within the required timeframe. The audit report detailed specific cases, including their submission dates and the corresponding delays in resolution. The Supreme Court required Judge Quijano to explain these delays, which he attributed to inadvertence and oversight, but his explanations were deemed insufficient.

Judicial Audit revealed eight cases unresolved within the 90-day period.
Specific cases and their submission dates were documented.
Judge Quijano's explanations for delays were found unsatisfactory.

Supreme Court's Resolution and Sanction

In response to the findings, the Supreme Court mandated Judge Quijano to provide an explanation for his inaction. Following his submission, the OCA recommended a fine of P20,000 for his undue failure to act on the cases. The Supreme Court ultimately imposed a reduced fine of P10,000, to be deducted from his retirement benefits, while emphasizing the necessity for judges to fulfill their duties diligently.

Supreme Court required Judge Quijano to explain his inaction.
OCA recommended a fine of P20,000 for undue delays.

...