G.R. No. A.M. No. P-15-3322, June 23, 2015
BRANCH CLERK OF COURT GAIL M. BACBAC-DEL ISEN, Complainant, vs. ROMAR Q. MOLINA, Respondent.

FACTS

The complainant, Branch Clerk of Court Gail M. Bacbac-Del Isen of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Baguio City, Branch 3, filed a verified complaint against respondent Romar Q. Molina, a Clerk III at the same court, for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. The complaint was based on an affidavit from bondsman Marie Rose Victoria C. Delson, who alleged that respondent solicited and received Three Thousand Pesos (P3,000) from her to facilitate the temporary release of an accused, Consuelo Romero, in a criminal case. Respondent told Delson, “Para mas madali ilakad magbigay ka ng three thousand pesos (3,000).” Delson gave the money, but the accused was released on bond without respondent’s effort, as he was only attending to the processing because the regular staff was at a seminar. Delson later demanded and received the money back in installments. Complainant also noted prior rumors of respondent asking money from bondsmen and clients. Respondent initially failed to file his Comment despite an extension. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) referred the case for investigation to Executive Judge Illuminada P. Cabato, who found respondent liable by a preponderance of evidence for violating the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel (Canon I, Sections 1 and 2, and Canon III, Section 2(b)) and recommended a one-year suspension. The OCA, after review, adopted the findings but recommended the penalty of dismissal.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent is guilty of grave misconduct for soliciting and receiving money from a client on the promise of a favor.

RULING

Yes, respondent is guilty of grave misconduct. The Supreme Court affirmed the findings and recommendation of the OCA. The positive and categorical testimony of witness Marie Rose Victoria C. Delson, who identified respondent as the one who solicited and received money, was deemed credible and constituted substantial evidence. Respondent’s defense consisted only of a bare denial and claims of short memory, which are inherently weak and cannot prevail over affirmative testimony. Soliciting and receiving money from litigants for personal gain, even if the favor was not granted and the money was returned, constitutes grave misconduct—a serious transgression that threatens the administration of justice and violates the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel and civil service rules. The Court emphasized that court personnel must adhere to strict standards of integrity, and their acts reflect on the judiciary. Given the gravity of the offense and respondent’s apparent proclivity for corruption (as indicated by prior rumors), no mitigating circumstances were applied. The penalty of dismissal is prescribed for such offenses. Respondent Romar Q. Molina is DISMISSED FROM THE SERVICE with forfeiture of all benefits (except accrued leave credits) and is disqualified from re-employment in any government branch or instrumentality, including government-owned or -controlled corporations.