Case Digest: OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. MARLON ROQUE et al.

OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. MARLON ROQUE et al.

578 SCRA 21 (2009)

The clerks of courts perform a delicate function as designated custodians of the court’s funds, revenues, records, properties and premises, failure to perform such functions are punishable.

Marlon Roque and Anita G. Nunag are the Clerks of Court of Municipal Trial Court in Cities of Angeles City. In a Resolution, the Supreme Court (SC) dismissed Cashier I Aurelia C. Lugue. The SC also directed Roque and Nunag to explain why they should not be disciplinary dealt with for failure in monitoring the activities of Lugue, relative to the proper handling of collections of legal fees.

Roque explained that he merely followed the procedures done by his predecessor and said that he did not suspect any shortages because the Auditors of the Commission on Audit did not find any shortages. On the other hand, Nunag explained that she was not familiar with the accounting procedures and she had confidence that there was no irregularity in the work of Roque and Lugue.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found Roque and Nunag guilty of Simple Negligence for failure to monitor the transactions and discover the modus operandi of Lugue.

ISSUE:

Whether or not Roque and Nunag are guilty of Simple Negligence

HELD:

It appears that respondents’ supervision as well as monitoring of the financial transactions of the court was merely perfunctory, relying in the main on the Monthly Reports and the fact that the amounts deposited matched the amount of collections.

Roque and Nunag’s lack or limited knowledge of accounting procedures does not exonerate them. To credit such defense would set similarly situated employees to lightly discharge their duty of employing reasonable skill and diligence and thus evade administrative liability.

That clerks of courts perform a delicate function as designated custodians of the court’s funds, revenues, records, properties and premises can never be overemphasized. They wear many hats – those of treasurer, accountant, guard and physical plant manager of the court, hence, are ―entrusted with the primary responsibility of correctly and effectively implementing regulations regarding fiduciary funds‖.