A.M. No. MTJ-02-1397. June 28, 2005.
REPORT ON THE ON-THE-SPOT JUDICIAL AUDIT CONDUCTED IN THE MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, TERESA-BARAS, RIZAL.

FACTS

This administrative case originated from a judicial audit following the compulsory retirement of Judge Ricardo P. Angeles of the MCTC, Teresa-Baras, Rizal, on September 10, 1999. The audit team discovered several criminal cases where Judge Angeles had prepared decisions but left them unpromulgated. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) advised the Acting Presiding Judge, Redemido B. Santos, that he could not promulgate decisions signed by the retired judge; he could only adopt the drafts as his own or write entirely new decisions, but any promulgated decision must bear his name as the ponente.
Despite this explicit advice and a subsequent Court Resolution dated February 23, 2000, directing him to desist from promulgating the specific cases decided by Judge Angeles, Judge Santos promulgated the decisions in Criminal Case Nos. 5394 and 5656 on November 3, 1999, and March 1, 2000, respectively. Both decisions were dated prior to Judge Angeles’s retirement and still carried his name as the author. Judge Santos later claimed he had acted before receiving the Court’s directive and that his designation was subsequently recalled. He also suffered serious health issues, leading to his disability retirement approved effective January 8, 2003.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Redemido B. Santos is administratively liable for promulgating decisions written and signed by a judge who had already retired.

RULING

Yes, Judge Santos is liable for Gross Ignorance of the Law. The Supreme Court emphasized the fundamental rule that a judge who has retired or otherwise left office can no longer decide cases or validly promulgate judgments. A decision becomes valid only upon its proper promulgation, and a judge who was no longer in office at the time of promulgation lacks the authority to render that judgment. Consequently, a successor judge is prohibited from promulgating a decision written and signed by a predecessor who has retired, as doing so renders the judgment void.
The Court found that Judge Santos violated this settled doctrine. Despite being advised by the audit team and later ordered by the Court to desist, he proceeded to promulgate two criminal cases that clearly bore the name of the retired Judge Angeles as the ponente. His subsequent disability retirement does not absolve him of administrative liability for acts committed while in office. Applying Rule 140 of the Rules of Court prevailing at the time of the violations (1999-2000), Gross Ignorance of the Law was a serious charge. The Court imposed a fine of Twenty Thousand Pesos (₱20,000.00), to be deducted from the ₱100,000.00 of his retirement benefits previously withheld by the OCA Finance Division for this purpose.