G.R. No. A.M. No. P-08-2559 March 19, 2010
RYAN S. PLAZA, Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court, Argao, Cebu, Complainant, vs. ATTY. MARCELINA R. AMAMIO, Clerk of Court, GENOVEVA R. VASQUEZ, Legal Researcher and FLORAMAY PATALINGHUG, Court Stenographer, all of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 26, Argao, Cebu, Respondents.

FACTS

Complainant Ryan S. Plaza, Clerk of Court of the Municipal Trial Court of Argao, Cebu, filed an administrative complaint against respondents Atty. Marcelina R. Amamio (Clerk of Court), Genoveva R. Vasquez (Legal Researcher), and Floramay Patalinghug (Court Stenographer), all of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 26, Argao, Cebu. The complaint alleged that respondents intentionally violated Administrative Circular No. 3-92 by allowing Sara Lee, a private company, to hold a party and raffle draw inside the Argao Hall of Justice on July 14, 2007. Complainant learned of the plan in early July 2007 and informed the RTC personnel about the prohibition. On the morning of July 14, 2007, the security guard informed complainant that Sara Lee personnel wanted to enter the Hall of Justice to set up for the event. Complainant directed the guard not to allow entry and called Atty. Amamio, who insisted she had authorized the event. The security logbook recorded that Vasquez approved the use of the entrance lobby for the raffle draw, which proceeded from 2:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. with 51 participants. Complainant also alleged that respondents later harassed the security guards for recording the event. Respondents, in their joint comment, did not deny allowing the raffle draw but argued they granted permission after considering a written request and precedent activities held at the Hall of Justice, including a beauty pageant during a town fiesta and spectators drinking alcohol in the lobby during a parade. They also cited similar raffle draws at the Cebu City Hall of Justice. Respondents claimed the raffle was a minor event, with only soft drinks and finger foods served, and no commercial transactions occurred. They denied harassing the guards, stating they only inspected the logbook and Amamio called the guards’ attention regarding entries about non-wearing of uniforms. The Investigating Judge recommended dismissal for lack of substantial evidence, finding no violation of the circular as the event was not for residential, dwelling, sleeping, or commercial purposes (no buying/selling for profit). However, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found respondents violated Administrative Circular No. 3-92 and recommended sanctions. Complainant later manifested his intention to desist from pursuing the case.

ISSUE

Whether respondents violated Administrative Circular No. 3-92 (Prohibition Against Use of Halls of Justice for Residential or Commercial Purposes) by allowing a private company to hold a raffle draw inside the Argao Hall of Justice.

RULING

Yes, respondents violated Administrative Circular No. 3-92. The Supreme Court adopted the findings and recommendations of the OCA. The Court held that the discretion to continue proceedings rests exclusively with it, notwithstanding complainant’s desistance. The Court emphasized that courts are temples of justice, and their dignity and sanctity must be preserved. The use of the Hall of Justice shall be exclusively for court or judicial functions. The raffle draw, a private commercial activity by Sara Lee, was not a court function. The Court rejected respondents’ defenses, stating that past unauthorized activities do not justify the present violation, and the historical significance of the building does not permit its use for such events. The raffle draw exposed judicial records to risk and undermined the court’s dignity. Atty. Marcelina R. Amamio was found GUILTY of simple misconduct and SUSPENDED for one month and one day with a stern warning. Genoveva R. Vasquez and Floramay Patalinghug were found GUILTY of violation of office rules and regulations and REPRIMANDED with a stern warning.