G.R. No. A.M. No. P-05-2082. December 12, 2011.
OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, vs. CLERK OF COURT HERMENEGILDO I. MARASIGAN, Regional Trial Court, Kabacan, North Cotabato, Respondent.

FACTS

An OCA audit team conducted a financial audit on the RTC, Kabacan, North Cotabato from June 7 to 16, 2004, covering the accountabilities of respondent Clerk of Court Hermenegildo I. Marasigan from April 1993 to May 2004. The audit revealed a cash shortage of ₱660.80, attributed to the respondent’s practice of depositing collections monthly instead of daily. The audit team also found a significant number of missing vital documents, including official receipts (both recorded and unrecorded in the cashbook), cancelled official receipts without original copies, deposit slips (some without machine validation), and Fiduciary Fund withdrawal documents and passbooks. Due to the unavailability of Fiduciary Fund passbooks, the audit team could not determine the interest earned on deposits that should have been remitted to the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF). The Court, acting on the OCA’s report, re-docketed it as an administrative complaint and directed the respondent to explain the shortage, his failure to deposit collections daily, his failure to maintain a cashbook for the Fiduciary Fund, his failure to present detached original copies of certain official receipts, his failure to comply with a prior OCA memorandum, and to account for and pay the interest earned on Fiduciary Fund deposits. He was also ordered to produce numerous missing documents, including specific missing official receipts, original copies of cancelled receipts, documents for Fiduciary Fund withdrawals totaling ₱410,938.00, details for other withdrawals totaling ₱136,660.00, and various Fiduciary Fund passbooks and account ledgers.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Clerk of Court Hermenegildo I. Marasigan is administratively liable for gross neglect of duty, dishonesty, and grave misconduct in the performance of his duties as an accountable officer.

RULING

Yes. The Court found respondent guilty of gross neglect of duty, dishonesty, and grave misconduct. The audit findings established his failure to perform his duties as an accountable officer with the required diligence. His monthly, instead of daily, deposit of court collections constituted gross neglect and violated circulars. The numerous missing official receipts and supporting documents for Fiduciary Fund withdrawals, totaling hundreds of thousands of pesos, indicated dishonesty and grave misconduct. His failure to account for the interest earned on Fiduciary Fund deposits and to produce the required passbooks further demonstrated gross negligence and dishonesty. The Court emphasized that clerks of court are accountable officers and their duties are primarily ministerial, requiring strict adherence to rules. The respondent’s actions eroded public trust in the judiciary. Considering the gravity of the offenses and his failure to satisfactorily explain or rectify the shortages and missing funds, the Supreme Court imposed the penalty of DISMISSAL from service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits (except accrued leave credits) and with prejudice to re-employment in any government branch or instrumentality. He was also ordered to restitute the total amount of ₱547,598.00 (representing the unaccounted Fiduciary Fund withdrawals of ₱410,938.00 and ₱136,660.00) and to remit the unremitted interest earned on the Fiduciary Fund deposits to the Judiciary Development Fund.