G.R. No. A.M. No. SCC-95-2 March 31, 1998
OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, complainant, vs. JUDGE AMER BARA-ACAL, respondent.

FACTS

A letter from “The Concerned Citizens of Tawi-Tawi,” dated July 15, 1994, was sent to the Chief Justice, alleging that Judge Amer Bara-acal of the Shari’a Circuit Court in Bongao, Tawi-Tawi, failed to report to his official station. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) referred the matter for discreet investigation to Judge Carlito Eisma of the RTC in Zamboanga City. Judge Eisma’s Legal Researcher, Abu B. Talipan, reported that, based on information from the Shari’a Court’s stenographer, Staff Assistant II, Clerk of Court, and the Provincial Chief of the Office of Muslim Affairs, respondent Judge had not been reporting regularly for work. The stenographer specifically stated that from June to November 1994, Judge Bara-acal never appeared at the office.
On June 26, 1995, the OCA requested copies of decisions, resolutions, and the court calendar from respondent’s station. The Clerk of Court submitted four orders issued by respondent and a court calendar showing only six settings, with no regular trials or hearings conducted.
On February 6, 1996, the report was treated as an administrative complaint. Respondent denied the allegations and moved for dismissal. The case was referred to Judge Salvador A. Memoracion for investigation. Judge Memoracion reported that respondent seldom went to his station in Bongao but regularly received his salary, and that respondent’s Certificates of Service for JanuaryApril 1994 and JuneOctober 1994 were falsified, as he never rendered regular service.
During a second investigation, employees of the MCTC in BongaoJulieta Morales (Court Stenographer), Rapia Ikkao, Abdal-Azing Amilbangsa, Sr. (Clerk of Court), and Guillermo Morales (Process Server)all longtime residents, stated they had never seen respondent in Bongao. Employees of the Shari’a Court initially confirmed respondent’s absence but later changed their statements, which Judge Memoracion found less credible due to the turnaround, likely influenced by respondent.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Amer Bara-acal is guilty of absenteeism and falsification of official documents (Certificates of Service), warranting administrative penalties.

RULING

Yes, respondent Judge is guilty of absenteeism and falsification of official documents. The Court found that the facts on record, including statements from independent and disinterested witnesses (MCTC employees), substantiated the charge of absenteeism. Respondent’s denial and the self-serving affidavits of his employees were insufficient to rebut the evidence.
The Interim Rules and Guidelines implementing Batas Pambansa Blg. 129 require judges to hold daily sessions and be present during office hours to ensure maximum court efficiency and speedy administration of justice. Respondent’s failure to report regularly constituted a violation of these rules. Moreover, his submission of Certificates of Service for 1994, falsely indicating no absences, constituted falsification of official documentsa grave offense under Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No. 30, warranting dismissal.
The Court emphasized that judges must adhere to strict standards of honesty and integrity. Respondent’s conduct, characterized by regular absenteeism amounting to abandonment of his station and falsification of records, tarnished the judiciary’s image. Therefore, the Court imposed the penalty of dismissal.
WHEREFORE, Judge Amer Bara-acal is DISMISSED from the service with prejudice to reinstatement in any government capacity, and with forfeiture of all earned or accrued retirement and other benefits.