G.R. No. A.M. No. P-08-2418; January 31, 2008
FERDINAND S. BASCOS, complainant, vs. ATTY. RAYMUNDO A. RAMIREZ, Clerk of Court, Regional Trial Court of Ilagan, Isabela, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Ferdinand S. Bascos, manager of The Valley Times newspaper, charged respondent Atty. Raymundo A. Ramirez, Clerk of Court and Ex-officio Provincial Sheriff of the RTC of Ilagan, Isabela, with neglect of duty, violation of court circulars, and partiality. The complaint stemmed from respondent’s alleged failure to comply with the Executive Judge’s directive to conduct a weekly raffle for the distribution of judicial and extra-judicial notices requiring publication, as mandated by P.D. No. 1079. Specifically, complainant alleged that respondent awarded 13 out of 14 foreclosure notices from the Pag-ibig Fund to a rival newspaper, Isabela Profile, without a raffle. Despite written orders from Executive Judge Juan A. Bigornia, Jr. to submit comments and specific documents regarding these applications and to implement a raffle system, respondent repeatedly failed to comply.
Complainant further alleged that respondent facilitated the ex-parte accreditation of Isabela Profile without a hearing, denying him an opportunity to oppose it on the ground that the newspaper had no editorial office in the province. He also accused respondent of concealing more than twenty foreclosure cases from the raffle, subsequently awarding them to Isabela Profile, and of demanding exorbitant commissions. Respondent denied all allegations, claiming he was a victim of business rivalry and that he merely followed the Judge’s orders, shifting responsibility to the Deputy Sheriffs.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Atty. Raymundo A. Ramirez is administratively liable for neglect of duty and violation of P.D. No. 1079 and related circulars concerning the raffle and publication of judicial notices.

RULING

Yes, respondent is administratively liable. The Supreme Court found that respondent, as Clerk of Court and Ex-officio Provincial Sheriff, failed to perform a mandatory, non-discretionary duty under P.D. No. 1079. The law explicitly requires the Executive Judge to designate a day for raffling judicial publications to qualified newspapers. As the court’s administrative officer tasked with supporting this function, respondent’s defiance of the Executive Judge’s direct orders to submit reports and implement the raffle constituted gross neglect of duty and insubordination. His defense of merely following orders by raffling applications to Deputy Sheriffs, while abdicating responsibility for the subsequent publication raffle, was untenable. His actions undermined the raffle system designed to ensure transparency and impartiality.
The Court emphasized that the procedural rules under P.D. No. 1079 are mandatory to prevent favoritism and ensure equal opportunity among qualified publications. Respondent’s failure to comply with the Judge’s directives and the statutory procedure warranted administrative sanction. The charge of extortion was dismissed for lack of substantial evidence. Considering his position as a lawyer and court officer, the Court found him guilty of simple neglect of duty and imposed a fine of Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00) with a stern warning.