SC censures Davao court exec over bail bond
August 30, 2004 | 12:00am
A Davao del Norte clerk of court is facing possible criminal charges for malversation of public funds for failing to return a P100,000 bail bond for three years.
In a per curiam decision, the Supreme Court still resolved to dismiss Minda Amar, clerk of court of the Municipal Trial Court of the Kapalong-Talaingod-Maniki area, even if she had been dropped from the service due to absences without leave.
"For any conduct which would violate the norms of public accountability, and diminish, or even tend to diminish, the faith of the people in the justice system, will not be tolerated or countenanced by the Court," the tribunal said.
The Supreme Court said Amars failure to immediately turn over the bail bond and explain and present evidence to the court administrators office as to why she could not produce the money "constitutes gross dishonesty, grave misconduct and even malversation of public funds for which dismissal from the service with forfeiture of all leave credits and of retirement privileges and with prejudice to reappointment (to any government position) are clearly appropriate."
In a complaint filed on May 12, 2000, lawyer Laurente Ilagan of the Ilagan, Te, Escudero, Laguindam and Jocom law firm, said Amar could not release the P100,000 bail bond that they posted for their clients even if the estafa cases against them had been dismissed on Sept. 28, 1999.
The dismissal became final on Oct. 12, 1999, and the entry of judgment was made on March 13, 2000.
Records showed that Amar received the money on July 30, 1999 but she deposited it in the bank only two weeks later.
Worse, the Supreme Court said Amar failed to return the money when it was demanded from her some time in February 2000.
It was only on June 10, 2003 when lawyer Jonathan Jocom certified that Amar finally released the money to their law firm.
In a per curiam decision, the Supreme Court still resolved to dismiss Minda Amar, clerk of court of the Municipal Trial Court of the Kapalong-Talaingod-Maniki area, even if she had been dropped from the service due to absences without leave.
"For any conduct which would violate the norms of public accountability, and diminish, or even tend to diminish, the faith of the people in the justice system, will not be tolerated or countenanced by the Court," the tribunal said.
The Supreme Court said Amars failure to immediately turn over the bail bond and explain and present evidence to the court administrators office as to why she could not produce the money "constitutes gross dishonesty, grave misconduct and even malversation of public funds for which dismissal from the service with forfeiture of all leave credits and of retirement privileges and with prejudice to reappointment (to any government position) are clearly appropriate."
In a complaint filed on May 12, 2000, lawyer Laurente Ilagan of the Ilagan, Te, Escudero, Laguindam and Jocom law firm, said Amar could not release the P100,000 bail bond that they posted for their clients even if the estafa cases against them had been dismissed on Sept. 28, 1999.
The dismissal became final on Oct. 12, 1999, and the entry of judgment was made on March 13, 2000.
Records showed that Amar received the money on July 30, 1999 but she deposited it in the bank only two weeks later.
Worse, the Supreme Court said Amar failed to return the money when it was demanded from her some time in February 2000.
It was only on June 10, 2003 when lawyer Jonathan Jocom certified that Amar finally released the money to their law firm.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
Latest
Recommended
November 11, 2024 - 12:00am