EN BANC
[A.M. No. RTJ-04-1826. August 16, 2016.]
GREENSTAR BOCAY MANGANDINGAN, complainant, vs. JUDGE SANTOS B. ADIONG, Regional Trial Court, Branch 8, Marawi City, ATTY. CAIRODING P. MARUHOM, Clerk of Court VI and MR. MASBOD M. SYBIL, Cash Clerk II, both of the RTC, Office of the Clerk of Court, Marawi City, respondents.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution datedAUGUST 16, 2016, which reads as follows:
"A.M. No. RTJ-04-1826: GREENSTAR BOCAY MANGANDINGAN, complainant, versus JUDGE SANTOS B. ADIONG, Regional Trial Court, Branch 8, Marawi City, ATTY. CAIRODING P. MARUHOM, Clerk of Court VI and MR. MASBOD M. SYBIL, Cash Clerk II, both of the RTC, Office of the Clerk of Court, Marawi City, respondents.
RESOLUTION
This matter refers to the Petition for Judicial Clemency filed on 21 April 2014 by Atty. Cairoding P. Maruhom (Atty. Maruhom). Atty. Maruhom prays that he be granted judicial clemency so he can apply and aspire for a judicial position in the future.
It will be recalled that in our Resolution dated 6 February 2008, the Court suspended Atty. Maruhom for simple misconduct. The dispositive portion of the Resolution states:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds:
1. Judge Santos B. Adiong GUILTY of gross ignorance of the law as well as gross misconduct constituting violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. He is DISMISSED from the service with forfeiture of all benefits except his accrued leave credits, if any. He is further disqualified from reinstatement or appointment to any public office, including government-owned or controlled corporations.
2. Atty. Cairoding P. Maruhom GUILTY of simple misconduct. He is SUSPENDED from office for three (3) months, effective immediately.
3. Mr. Mashod M. Sybil GUILTY of simple misconduct. He is SUSPENDED from office for three (3) months, effective immediately.
SO ORDERED. 1
Atty. Maruhom filed a Motion for Reconsideration dated 27 February 2008. In our Resolution dated 9 March 2010, we denied the motion for reconsideration with finality since no substantial arguments were presented to warrant the reversal of the questioned resolution. The decision attained finality and Atty. Maruhom served his three-month suspension from office.
In a Resolution dated 10 March 2015, this Court required Atty. Maruhom to submit certifications or testimonials of the officers or chapters of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, judges or judges associations and prominent members of the community with proven integrity and probity, as proof of remorse and reformation. Thereafter, Atty. Maruhom submitted the following: (1) Certification dated 13 April 2015 issued by Executive Judge Wenida B.M. Papandayan of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Lanao del Sur stating that Atty. Maruhom has been observed to be more diligent and extra careful in handling newly filed and unraffled cases including parties' request for referral of cases with urgent prayer for the issuance of Temporary Restraining Order to the Executive Judge before raffling so as not to commit the same mistakes that resulted in an administrative penalty of three months suspension; and (2) Certification dated 13 April 2015 issued by Barangay Chairwoman Naima T. Bara of Barangay Panggao Saduc, City of Marawi stating that Atty. Maruhom has been active in spearheading amicable settlements of local disputes and conflicts involving barangay constituents including community-based projects and programs geared towards the promotion and maintenance of peace and order and cleanliness in said barangay.
In his Petition for Judicial Clemency, Atty. Maruhom prayed that the three-month suspension imposed upon him pursuant to our Resolution dated 6 February 2008 should not be a legal impediment in his desire to apply for a judicial position. Atty. Maruhom stated that he had duly served his suspension from office. He also added that he has applied several times for judicial positions both in the first and second level courts but despite having complied with all the requirements, he has not been considered due to his three-month suspension, which forms part of his service record. aDSIHc
Section 5, Rule 4 of the Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council provides:
SEC. 5. Disqualification. — The following are disqualified from being nominated for appointment to any judicial post or as Ombudsman or Deputy Ombudsman:
1. Those with pending criminal or regular administrative cases;
2. Those with pending criminal cases in foreign courts or tribunals; and
3. Those who have been convicted in any criminal case; or in an administrative case, where the penalty imposed is at least a fine of more than P10,000, unless he has been granted judicial clemency. (Emphasis supplied)
Considering Atty. Maruhom's penalty of three-month suspension from office, he is disqualified from being nominated for appointment to any judicial post, unless he is accorded judicial clemency.
In Re: Letter of Judge Augustus C. Diaz, Metropolitan Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 37, Appealing for Judicial Clemency, 2 the Court laid down the following guidelines in resolving requests for judicial clemency:
1. There must be proof of remorse and reformation. These shall include but should not be limited to certifications or testimonials of the officer(s) or chapter(s) of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, judges or judges associations and prominent members of the community with proven integrity and probity. A subsequent finding of guilt in an administrative case for the same or similar misconduct will give rise to a strong presumption of non-reformation.
2. Sufficient time must have lapsed from the imposition of the penalty to ensure a period of reformation.
3. The age of the person asking for clemency must show that he still has productive years ahead of him that can be put to good use by giving him a chance to redeem himself.
4. There must be a showing of promise (such as intellectual aptitude, learning or legal acumen or contribution to legal scholarship and the development of the legal system or administrative and other relevant skills), as well as potential for public service.
5. There must be other relevant factors and circumstances that may justify clemency.
Applying the guidelines to the present case, we find merit in Atty. Maruhom's request. Atty. Maruhom accepted and served the penalty of suspension for misconduct in our Resolution dated 6 February 2008. It has been eight years since our Resolution was promulgated and the lapse of time is sufficient to show that Atty. Maruhom has reformed. Also, there had been sufficient proof of remorse and reformation through the certifications issued by the Executive Judge of the RTC of Lanao del Sur and the Barangay Chairwoman of Panggao Saduc, City of Marawi expressing renewed trust and confidence in Atty. Maruhom's work and commitment to the community. Further, having served the government for 44 years, the last 26 years of which as Clerk of Court VI and Ex-Officio Sheriff, Office of the Clerk of Court, RTC, Marawi City, Atty. Maruhom's plight merits compassion from the Court and we should accord him the opportunity to further develop and advance in his judicial career.
WHEREFORE, we GRANT the Petition for Judicial Clemency. Atty. Cairoding P. Maruhom is accorded judicial clemency for his past administrative offense in our Resolution of 6 February 2008." Brion, J., on leave. (adv8) ETHIDa
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) FELIPA B. ANAMAClerk of Court
Footnotes
1. Rollo, p. 239.
2. 560 Phil. 1, 5-6 (2007).