G.R. No.: A.M. No. RTJ-23-040 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 20-5081-RTJ), June 25, 2024
Case Title: Office of the Court Administrator, Complainant, vs. Hon. Myla M. Villavicencio-Olan, Presiding Judge; Atty. Rica Kathrine R. Austria, Clerk of Court V; Alvin P. Pilit, Sheriff IV; Keren Keisha L. Bobis, Psychologist II; Irene M. Anatalio, Court Stenographer III; Clarrene Faith Aliazas, Clerk III; Oscar R. Rodelas, Jr., Process Server; and Monette P. Camacho, Court Interpreter III, All of Branch 7, Regional Trial Court (Family Court), San Pablo City, Laguna, Respondents.

FACTS

An anonymous letter complaint dated July 21, 2019, alleged that the respondents from Branch 7, RTC (Family Court) of San Pablo City, Laguna, violated the court’s “No Noon Break” policy. The complainant claimed that on more than three occasions before 11:00 a.m., no employees were present, and on July 19, 2019, the office was closed the entire afternoon, with no one attending the flag retreat ceremony. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) directed an investigation. Executive Judge Luvina P. Roque’s investigation, based on the guard’s logbook and attendance records for the flag ceremony, found that on July 19, 2019, the Presiding Judge and her staff left the Hall of Justice at lunchtime (12:30 p.m. and 1:00 p.m.) with no logbook entries showing their return, and they were absent from the flag lowering ceremony. The Clerk of Court of the Office of the Clerk of Court also affirmed the office was locked in the afternoon. In their Joint Comment, Judge Villavicencio-Olan and Atty. Austria argued the earlier allegations were baseless. For July 19, they claimed the office was not closed, as two staff members (a stenographer and a legal researcher) were present the whole day, and the others left to visit and prepare their new office site—conducting inventory, cleaning, and coordinating with agencies for water and electric line installations—which they considered official business.

ISSUE

Whether the respondents are administratively liable for violating office rules, specifically the “No Noon Break” policy and for being absent from the office during official hours without proper authorization on July 19, 2019.

RULING

Yes, the respondents are administratively liable. The Court found the respondents’ explanation for their absence on July 19, 2019, unsubstantiated and unacceptable. The claim that two staff members remained in the office was contradicted by the investigating executive judge’s report and the affidavit of the Clerk of Court of the Office of the Clerk of Court, who found the office locked. The respondents failed to provide any documentary proof, such as a travel order or memorandum, to authorize their absence for the alleged official business of preparing the new office. Their actions constituted Gross Neglect of Duty and Gross Insubordination for violating Supreme Court circulars and the “No Noon Break” policy. The Court emphasized that court officials and employees must strictly observe prescribed office hours and secure proper authorization for any absence. All respondents were found guilty of Gross Neglect of Duty and Gross Insubordination. Judge Myla M. Villavicencio-Olan was fined P40,000. Atty. Rica Kathrine R. Austria was suspended for six months without pay. The court personnel (Alvin P. Pilit, Keren Keisha L. Bobis, Irene M. Anatalio, Clarrene Faith Aliazas, Oscar R. Rodelas, Jr., and Monette P. Camacho) were suspended for three months without pay. All respondents were sternly warned that a repetition would be dealt with more severely.