Enjoining All Officials and Employees of the Judiciary to Strictly Observe the Prohibition Against Gambling or Engaging in Other Forms of Gambling within Court Premises

June 18, 2007

SUPREME COURT MEMORANDUM CIRCULAR NO. 09-07

ENJOINING ALL OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES OF THE JUDICIARY TO STRICTLY OBSERVE THE PROHIBITION AGAINST GAMBLING OR ENGAGING IN OTHER FORMS OF GAMBLING WITHIN COURT PREMISES

WHEREAS, the Code of Conduct for Court Personnel provides that any act of impropriety committed by court personnel "immeasurably affects the honor and dignity of the Judiciary and the people's confidence in it;"

WHEREAS, the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees directs public officials and employees to refrain from doing acts contrary to good morals and good customs;

WHEREAS, the Supreme Court has always enjoined court employees to adhere to the exacting standards of morality and decency in their professional as well as private conduct in order to preserve the good name and integrity of the courts of justice;

WHEREAS, the Court has received reports that court employees have been observed gambling or engaging in other forms of gambling within court premises (not only in covert places but also in areas which could be easily sighted by other personnel and the transacting public);

WHEREAS, studies show that gambling is a manipulative and ruinous means of exploiting the individual's weaknesses, his misplaced belief in and reliance on luck or "suerte;" and his misapprehension of the role of skill in playing the game; TcDIaA

WHEREAS, the Court has ruled that "gambling is . . . absolutely forbidden at court premises during office hours;" and that it "generates unwholesome consequences on the gambler as it diverts his attention from the more important responsibilities of his job;" 1 and

WHEREAS, in an instance where court employees were apprehended engaged in a card game within the judge's chambers which game allegedly did not involve monetary bets, the Court still imposed disciplinary sanctions on the erring personnel on the ground that such act violated norms of public accountability; 2

Now, therefore, all officials and employees of all courts under the Judiciary (from the Supreme Court to the first and second level courts) are enjoined to strictly heed the prohibition against gambling or engaging in other forms of gambling within court premises. In order to maintain the highest level of ethical conduct and morals in the Judiciary, gambling and any forms thereof, regardless of whether or not they involve monetary bets, shall not be allowed, tolerated or condoned.

The appropriate administrative disciplinary action shall be taken against any court official or employee caught gambling or engaging in any form of gambling within court premises (whether such gambling activities occur during working days or weekends/holidays; or during office hours or beyond office hours).

In the Supreme Court, the Chief of Staff of the Office of the Chief Justice and the respective Judicial Staff Heads of the Offices of the Associate Justices, the Court Administrator, the Clerk of Court and Division Clerks of Court, the Chiefs of Offices of the different offices, the Chancellor of the Philippine Judicial Academy, and the Judicial and Bar Council Executive Committee Chairman shall ensure that personnel in their offices shall comply fully and faithfully with the policy proscribing gambling and any forms thereof within court premises. They shall adopt such measures as may be necessary to prevent the commission of all forms of gambling within their areas of supervision.

The respective Presiding Justices of the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan and Court of Tax Appeals, insofar as their courts are concerned, and the Court Administrator, with regard to the lower courts, shall see to the implementation of this Memorandum Circular. acCTSE

Issued this 18th day of June 2007.

 

(SGD.) REYNATO S. PUNOChief Justice

Footnotes

1. Re: Amado T. Resma, et al., A.M. No. P-2387, May 13, 1981 (104 SCRA 336); Paiste vs. Mementa, A.M. No. P-03-1697, October 1, 2003 (412 SCRA 403).

2. Judge Albano-Madrid vs. Apolonio, et al., A.M. No. P-01-1517, February 7, 2003 (397 SCRA 120).