Compassionate rule

Dishonesty or disposition to lie, cheat, deceive, defraud or betray, is a grave offense punishable with dismissal even if committed for the first time. But in this case of Pia and Lin, the rule was not strictly applied.

Pia and Lin were Social Welfare Officers in the Office of the Clerk of Court of a Regional Trial Court (RTC). They usually conduct investigation and interviews on cases involving Family Law. On August 1, 2008, they had to go to another town in the afternoon to conduct an impromptu interview with the parties in an adoption case. Pressed for time, they did not pass by the RTC Office anymore to register their attendance in the logbook. Neither did they obtain the corresponding travel order for their trip.

Upon finishing the interview in the afternoon, Pia and Lin thought of punching in their Bundy clock cards to make it appear that they were present the whole day of August 1, 2008. And so, after having dinner with their supposed clients, the two punch in their cards at 19:30 and 19:31 respectively, thinking that the cards would register as 7:30 a.m. and 7:31 a.m.

Eventually it was noticed that the attendance logbook of the RTC does not contain their names on August 1, 2008, yet on their Bundy clock cards it appeared that they were present on that date. So Pia and Lin were directed to comment on the alleged irregularity in the use of the Bundy clock.

In their comment, both Pia and Lin readily confessed to the irregularities they committed and feverishly sought the forgiveness of the Court. In her comment Pia even revealed that she is suffering from stage 2 Breast Cancer and was in dire financial straits. Lin on the other hand vowed never to repeat the same mistake.

After investigation, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found that Pia and Lin actually committed no less than two offenses, leaving the court premises without any travel order and fraudulently punching in their Bundy cards which was an act of dishonesty, a grave offense punishable with dismissal. But the OCA nevertheless recommended that they only be suspended for six months because of the mitigating circumstances such as their length of service in the judiciary, their acknowledgment of guilt and feeling of remorse and family circumstances. Was the OCA recommendation correct?

Yes. While Pia and Lin indeed committed two offenses — leaving the court premises without any travel order, which is a light offense, and dishonesty for fraudulently punching in their Bundy clock cards, which is a grave offense, the mitigating circumstances considered by the OCA justify the imposition of the penalty of six month suspension for each of them. This compassion extended by the Court is not without legal basis. Section 53, Rule IV of the Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases (CSC Memo Circular 991936, August 31, 1999) grants the disciplining authority the discretion to consider mitigating circumstances in the imposition of the proper penalty (Re: Irregularity in the use of Bundy Clock by Castro and Tayag, RTC Angeles City, A.M. P-10-2763, February 10, 2010, 612 SCRA 124).

Note: Books containing compilation of my articles on Labor and Criminal Law (Vols. I and II) are now available. Call tel. 7249445.

* * *

E-mail at: [email protected]