The Neglected Scrolls and the Court of Divine Order in AM P 22 053
The administrative case of Judge Santiago vs. Fernando evokes the mythological theme of a sacred order disrupted by negligence. The court, akin to a temple of Themis or Justitia, operates on strict rituals and timelines where documents are modern-day scrolls essential to its divine function of rendering judgment. The respondent utility worker, appointed as a keeper of these scrolls (Clerk III), fails in his duty, allowing critical offerings of evidence to languish. This neglect is not a mere procedural error but a symbolic rupture in the temple’s order, preventing the judge, as the high priest of justice, from performing his oracular duty to speak the law. The delayed pleadings become like misplaced artifacts, causing the machinery of fate-the resolution of cases-to grind to a halt, echoing myths where a single neglected duty brings cosmic disorder.
This narrative also resonates with literary archetypes of the tragic flaw and the burden of duty. The respondent, elevated from a minor role (Utility Worker) to a position of trust, embodies the everyman thrust into greater responsibility. His defense-that his lapses were unintentional, born of being overwhelmed by “numerous daily tasks”-mirrors the classic tragic error of hamartia, a mistake in judgment stemming not from malice but from human fallibility and poor prioritization. Yet, within the rigid, unforgiving structure of the judiciary, where every delay can mean justice denied, such human frailty transforms into the grave sin of neglect. The story thus becomes a moral parable on the weight of office, where even unintentional failure to uphold protocol carries the severe consequence of undermining the very edifice of justice.
Ultimately, the resolution of this matter serves as a ritual restoration of order. The administrative proceeding, conducted en banc by the Supreme Court, acts as a council of elders or gods reassessing the breach of cosmic law. By scrutinizing the acts of insubordination and neglect, the judicial system reasserts its immutable principles, much like a myth reaffirming the triumph of order over chaos. The case transcends a simple personnel dispute, becoming a symbolic reaffirmation that the temple of justice must be maintained with impeccable, almost sacred, diligence by all its acolytes, lest the entire structure lose its authority and power.
SOURCE: AM P 22 053; (January, 2023)
