G.R. No. A.M. No. 93-9-1237-RTC August 21, 1997
RE: LOSS OF COURT EXHIBITS AT RTC, BR. 136, MAKATI CITY.

FACTS

In August 1993, Atty. Cynthia H. Marmita, Branch Clerk of Court of RTC, Branch 136, Makati, reported the loss of court exhibits, consisting of twelve short firearms and ammunition, from a steel cabinet in the courtroom. The cabinet showed no signs of forced entry. Presiding Judge Jose R. Bautista immediately directed Atty. Marmita to report the loss to the police and to secure the court premises. The matter was treated as an administrative case, and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) was directed to investigate. The NBI’s 1996 report, while noting hearsay information implicating a relative of a former casual employee, concluded there was no concrete evidence to identify the perpetrator and effectively absolved Atty. Marmita of direct involvement in the theft.
However, a review of the case records revealed that seven of the criminal cases involving the lost firearms had been terminated years prior to the discovery of the loss in 1993. The Manual for Clerks of Court explicitly directs that firearms in court custody be turned over to the nearest Constabulary Command, specifically the Firearms and Explosives Unit in Camp Crame for Metro Manila, after the termination of the relevant cases.

ISSUE

Whether Atty. Cynthia H. Marmita, as Branch Clerk of Court, is administratively liable for the loss of the court exhibits.

RULING

Yes, Atty. Marmita is administratively liable. The Supreme Court emphasized that while the NBI found no evidence linking her to the actual theft, her liability stems from a separate, antecedent administrative duty. As Branch Clerk of Court, her responsibilities under the Manual include the paramount duty of safekeeping all records, papers, files, and exhibits. A specific provision mandates the turnover of firearms to the proper authorities after case termination.
The Court’s legal logic is that her failure to comply with this clear directive constituted negligence. By not disposing of the firearms as required upon the finality of the judgments in the seven cases—some terminated as early as 1989—she allowed these dangerous exhibits to remain unnecessarily and vulnerably in the court’s cabinet for years. This omission created the condition that enabled their eventual loss. The Court held that Clerks of Court play a vital role in the administration of justice, and their administrative functions, including the proper management and disposition of exhibits, are indispensable. Her negligence warranted disciplinary action. Consequently, the Court fined her Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00), to be deducted from her retirement benefits.