A.M. No. P-16-3614, June 20, 2017
Anonymous, Complainant vs. Glenn L. Namol, Court Interpreter, Erla Joie L. Roco, Legal Researcher and Edselbert Anthony A. Garabato, Process Server, all of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 63, Bayawan City, Negros Oriental, Respondents

FACTS

An anonymous complaint from Concerned Lawyers of Negros Oriental was filed against three court employees of RTC Branch 63, Bayawan City. Respondents Process Server Edselbert “Jun-Jun” Garabato and Court Interpreter Glenn Namol were accused of grave misconduct. The allegations included soliciting money from Danilo Lasconia, father of an accused in a dismissed rape case, under the pretense that it was for court personnel. They also allegedly collected Php 6,000 from a teacher and her fiancé for marriage solemnization, promising to give a portion to a judge, but only partially refunded the money when the marriage did not proceed.
Separately, Garabato, together with Legal Researcher Erla Joie Roco, was implicated in a case-fixing scheme. A transcript from a meeting called by the presiding judge revealed that Garabato had solicited Php 10,000 from litigant Hanny Bucad, who was charged with illegal gambling, promising to facilitate a plea to a lesser offense. Bucad paid Php 3,000. Roco later mediated by visiting Bucad’s home and facilitating the return of the money after the matter was brought to the judge’s attention.

ISSUE

Whether respondents are administratively liable for the acts alleged in the complaint.

RULING

The Court found the respondents administratively liable with varying degrees of penalty based on the evidence and their respective participation. For Edselbert Garabato, the Court found the evidence of his solicitation of money from litigants to be substantial and credible. His actions constituted Grave Misconduct and Conduct Prejudicial to the Best Interest of the Service. Such acts erode public trust in the judiciary. Considering the gravity of the offenses, which involved corruption and abuse of his position, the penalty of dismissal from service was imposed, with forfeiture of all benefits except accrued leave credits and with prejudice to re-employment in any government agency.
For Glenn Namol, the Court found insufficient evidence to conclusively prove his participation in the money solicitation schemes as alleged. However, the investigation established that he was habitually loitering and absent from his post without official reason. This constituted Loafing, a less grave offense. He was found guilty and reprimanded with a stern warning. For Erla Joie Roco, while she did not solicit money, her act of mediating a settlement between Garabato and the complainant, by visiting the litigant’s home to facilitate the return of the money, constituted Simple Neglect of Duty. Her intervention, though perhaps well-intentioned, was an improper exercise of her functions. She was also reprimanded with a stern warning. The Court further directed an investigation into the presiding judge’s inaction upon learning of Garabato’s activities.