G.R. No. A.M. No. P-17-3659. March 20, 2018. Anonymous Complaint against Emeliano C. Camay, Jr., Utility Worker I, Branch 61, Regional Trial Court, Bogo City, Cebu.
FACTS:

An anonymous complaint in 2003 charged Emeliano C. Camay, Jr., a Utility Worker at the RTC in Bogo City, Cebu, with serious offenses including immorality for cohabiting with a woman not his wife and siring a child, bail fixing through a “10+1” scheme with a surety company, failure to truthfully declare assets in his SALNs, trafficking in women, and maintaining a lavish lifestyle inconsistent with his salary. Camay denied the allegations, submitting documents like an NSO certificate and a city assessor’s certification to refute paternity and property ownership. The case was referred for investigation.
The investigation, led by Executive Judge Teresita Abarquez-Galandia, gathered evidence from anonymous witnesses and official records. It confirmed Camay was married but factually separated, living with Maria Fe G. Guevarra, with whom he had a son named Jumar. His SALNs showed inconsistencies in declaring real properties and acquisitions. Informants, including a city prosecutor, attested to his involvement in bail fixing for a percentage. Judge Galandia also personally observed his concrete house, noting his salary alone was insufficient for such assets.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Emeliano C. Camay, Jr. is administratively liable for the charges against him.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court found Camay guilty and dismissed him from service. The ruling applied the substantial evidence standard for administrative cases. The investigation established by substantial evidence that Camay engaged in disgraceful and immoral conduct by cohabiting with a woman other than his legal spouse and having a child with her, which tarnished the judiciary’s integrity. He violated Administrative Circular No. 5 (1988) by acting as a liaison for a surety company in bail bond transactions, a clear conflict of interest and unethical solicitation. Furthermore, he violated Section 8 of Republic Act No. 6713 (Code of Conduct for Public Officials) by filing SALNs with omissions and inaccuracies regarding his assets and dependents, failing to uphold the duty of transparency. The Court emphasized that all judiciary personnel must exemplify uprightness to preserve public trust. His actions collectively demonstrated a pattern of conduct unbecoming a court employee. The penalty of dismissal with forfeiture of benefits and disqualification from re-employment was imposed as the offenses involved moral turpitude and eroded public confidence in the judicial system.