AM RTJ 07 2045; (January, 2010) (Digest)
G.R. No. A.M. No. RTJ-07-2045 January 19, 2010
OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, vs. JUDGE HARUN B. ISMAEL, Respondent.
FACTS
A judicial audit was conducted from April 25 to May 14, 2005, in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur, Branch 22, presided over by respondent Judge Harun B. Ismael. The audit revealed his failure to decide and act on numerous current and inherited cases, as well as to resolve incidents in various cases, within the reglementary period. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) issued a memorandum on June 9, 2005, directing Judge Ismael to explain these failures and to inform the OCA if cases submitted for decision had been decided. He was ordered to cease hearing cases and confine himself to deciding or resolving submitted cases. Judge Edilberto G. Absin was directed to handle active cases in his stead. The OCA found in a subsequent memorandum dated February 26, 2007, that Judge Ismael failed to fully comply with its directives and did not request extensions. Although partial compliance was noted through a letter from the former clerk of court, Atty. Insor A. Pantaran, the OCA established that respondent committed gross inefficiency by unduly delaying actions in a large number of cases.
ISSUE
Whether respondent Judge Harun B. Ismael is administratively liable for gross inefficiency due to his failure to decide and resolve cases within the reglementary period.
RULING
Yes, respondent Judge Harun B. Ismael is found GUILTY of gross inefficiency and violation of Section 5, Canon 6 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary. The Court emphasized that failure to decide or resolve cases within the reglementary period constitutes gross inefficiency, a less serious charge punishable under the rules. The New Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to perform duties efficiently and with reasonable promptness. The Court also applied A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC, treating the administrative case as a disciplinary proceeding against him as a member of the bar, finding him guilty of violating Canons 1 and 12, and Rules 1.03 and 12.04 of the Code of Professional Responsibility. The penalty imposed was a fine of ₱20,000 for gross inefficiency and a fine of ₱10,000 for violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility.