A.M. No. P-87-104. July 16, 1990. OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, complainant, vs. PABLO R. RACADAG, Court Interpreter, Regional Trial Court, Branch 27, Naga City, respondent.
FACTS

Respondent Pablo R. Racadag, while employed as a Staff Assistant II and acting Clerk of Court of the RTC in Irosin, Sorsogon, was charged before the Sandiganbayan for malversation of public funds under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code. The information alleged that he willfully allowed two lawyers to appropriate for their personal use the sum of P12,000.00, which was redemption money deposited by a litigant in a civil case. He disregarded written directives from his superiors to deposit the money with a bank. Pursuant to a Court En Banc resolution, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) filed an administrative complaint against him for malversation and conduct prejudicial to the service. The respondent failed to submit an answer despite notices.
During the pendency of the criminal case, and without disclosing its existence, Racadag secured a transfer and was appointed as Court Interpreter of the RTC in Naga City. At the Sandiganbayan, after pleading not guilty, he jumped bail and remained at large, leading to a trial in absentia. On June 30, 1989, the Sandiganbayan rendered a decision finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to imprisonment, perpetual special disqualification, a fine, and indemnity. The judgment became final and executory on July 11, 1989.

ISSUE

Whether the respondent should be dismissed from the service based on his conviction for malversation of public funds and his conduct during the administrative proceedings.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of respondent Pablo R. Racadag from the service. The legal logic is anchored on the nature of his conviction and his procedural defaults. First, his final conviction by the Sandiganbayan for malversation of public funds constitutes conclusive evidence of his grave misconduct and lack of fitness to remain in the judiciary. The crime of malversation, involving breach of public trust and accountability, is inherently prejudicial to the best interest of the service and directly contravenes the exacting standards of integrity demanded from court personnel.
Second, his procedural behavior compounded his culpability. His repeated failure to file an answer to the administrative complaint, despite due notice, was deemed an admission of the charges and a sign of disrespect for the proceedings. Furthermore, his act of jumping bail and evading trial demonstrated guilt and a blatant disregard for legal processes. The Court also noted that his subsequent appointment in Naga City was secured through non-disclosure of the pending case, an act of dishonesty. The penalty of perpetual special disqualification imposed by the Sandiganbayan itself rendered him ineligible to hold any public office. Consequently, dismissal with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and prejudice to re-employment in any government instrumentality was the appropriate administrative sanction to preserve the integrity of the judicial service.