G.R. No. A.M. No. 19-08-19-CA, October 15, 2019
RE: REPORT OF ATTY. MARIA CONSUELO AISSA P. WONG-RUSTE, ASSISTANT CLERK OF COURT, COURT OF APPEALS, VISAYAS STATION, CEBU CITY “RE: MISSING ORIGINAL RECORDS OF CA-G.R. CV No. 01293, SOFIA TABUADA, ET AL. VS. ELEANOR TABUADA, ET AL.”

FACTS

This administrative matter arose from the loss of the original records of CA-G.R. CV No. 01293, entitled “Sofia Tabuada, et al. v. Eleanor Tabuada, et al.” (Tabuada case). The records were received by the Archives Unit of the Judicial Records Section (JRS) of the Court of Appeals, Visayas Station (CA-Visayas) on February 9, 2010, and were assigned a specific locator (Shelf 15, Row 5, Right Column) in the safekeeping area. Sometime in January 2014, during an inventory, Anthony F. Delima III discovered the records were missing from their assigned shelf. The loss was not immediately reported to higher authorities. In June 2016, a litigant’s representative requested a copy of the records, prompting further unsuccessful searches. Mario C. Agura, the Head of the Archives Unit, submitted explanations stating the records might have been inadvertently moved or transferred, and that he had sent tracers to lower courts. An investigation was conducted by Atty. Maria Consuela Aissa P. Wong-Ruste, who found the Archives Unit’s system for custodianship and safekeeping to be insecure and inefficient. The investigation revealed the safekeeping area was not secure, there was no logbook for key usage, the index cards for tracking record movements were not updated, records could be pulled out by any employee, there was no periodic inventory, and there were instances of records being remanded to the wrong court. Atty. Wong-Ruste recommended that Agura be held liable for simple neglect of duty.

ISSUE

Whether or not Mario C. Agura, Head of the Archives Unit of CA-Visayas, should be held administratively liable for simple neglect of duty for the loss of the original records.

RULING

Yes, Mario C. Agura is GUILTY of SIMPLE NEGLECT OF DUTY. The Supreme Court adopted the findings of the Investigating Officer but modified the recommended penalty.
The Court held that Agura, as the head of the Archives Unit, occupied a highly sensitive position as the designated custodian of all court records. His primary duty was to safekeep all original records and rollos and to monitor and maintain a record of these documents. The loss of the original records under his custody reflected an inefficient and disorderly system of keeping case records and a lack of close supervision over his subordinates. His failure to take appropriate action within a reasonable time after the discovery of the missing records in 2016, and his delay in reporting the loss to his supervisor, manifested carelessness and indifference. His defenses—lack of proper orientation, insufficient manpower, and the mere surmise that the records were misplaced—were deemed unavailing. The Court emphasized that all court personnel must perform their duties with diligence and professionalism, and that court records are confidential documents requiring safeguarding.
As for the penalty, the Court considered Agura’s length of service (15 years) and the fact that he was discharging frontline functions with an insufficient personnel complement. Instead of the recommended one-month-and-one-day suspension, the Court imposed a FINE equivalent to his salary for three (3) months, with a stern warning that a repetition would warrant a more severe penalty.