G.R. No. A.M. No. 95-1-01-MTCC January 5, 1998
In Re: REPORT OF COA ON THE SHORTAGE OF THE ACCOUNTABILITIES OF CLERK OF COURT LILIA S. BUENA, MTCC, NAGA CITY. FRANCISCO L. MARASIGAN and FRANCISCO T. DELA VINA, complainants, vs. LILIA S. BUENA as Clerk of Court, MTCC, Naga City, respondent.

FACTS

This administrative case originated from a letter-recommendation dated June 9, 1994, by COA Director Francisco L. Marasigan, based on a report and examination of the cash and accounts of respondent Lilia S. Buena, Clerk of Court and Ex-Officio Sheriff of the MTCC, Naga City. State Auditor Francisco T. Dela Viña, who conducted the examination, executed a sworn affidavit charging Buena with malversation under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code, having found a shortage of P81,650.00. The audit, prompted by an anonymous tip, involved a reexamination and comparison of the MTCC docket book, the cash book maintained by Buena, and file copies of official receipts. It revealed that from late 1989 until 1993, the total collection in the cash book was only P8,092.00, while the docket book reflected P89,742.00, showing a shortage. The audit discovered Buena had altered official receipts by understating amounts paid and changing payment particulars to make docket, sheriff, and legal research fees appear as clearance or certification fees. Upon demand, Buena admitted the shortage, explaining she resorted to it due to financial strain from her son’s hospitalization after a shooting incident, hoping for reimbursement from NAPOLCOM. She expressed repentance and willingness to restitute. She subsequently fully paid the P81,650.00 shortage. A separate audit by the Supreme Court’s Fiscal Audit Division (FAD) also found a deficit in Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) collections amounting to P29,776.00, of which P18,000.00 had been remitted, leaving a balance of P11,776.00, which Buena also promised to pay and later restituted. In her comment to the Court, Buena pleaded for compassion, citing 27 years of service, family medical crises, and her repentance, and prayed for optional retirement.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Lilia S. Buena is administratively liable for her actions involving the shortage of public funds and JDF collections, and if so, what is the appropriate penalty.

RULING

The Court found respondent Lilia S. Buena administratively guilty of dishonesty and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. The Court emphasized that public office is a public trust and that court personnel must uphold the highest standards of integrity. Buena’s systematic alteration of official receipts and conversion of court collections for personal use over about four years constituted grave offenses. While the Court acknowledged her restitution, repentance, long service, and the family circumstances that led to her actions, it held that these do not extinguish her administrative liability. However, considering these mitigating factors—her demonstrated repentance, immediate full restitution, and sincere effort to reform—the Court deemed it appropriate to temper the penalty. Instead of dismissal, the Court ruled that respondent is DEEMED RESIGNED from the service effective immediately, with prejudice to re-employment in any branch, instrumentality, or agency of the government, including government-owned and controlled corporations. Her leave credits and retirement benefits were ordered to be released to her in due course.