You're currently signed in as:
User

REPORT ON FINANCIAL AUDIT IN RTC

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

2010-04-23
PER CURIAM
A previous case shares a similar factual milieu with the case at bench. In Report on the Financial Audit in RTC v. General Santos City and the RTC and MTC of Polomolok, South Cotabato,[36] the clerk of court, after an audit, was shocked to learn of the irregularities in the handling of court funds committed by a social worker officer cum cash clerk, to whom he delegated his responsibilities because he "did not know accounting procedures and he did not want to antagonize the members of his staff by changing the system already in place upon his assumption to office." The clerk therein admitted the shortage of funds and that "she loaned money taken from her collection to her co-employees because otherwise they would fall prey to loan sharks or usurers charging interest rate ranging from 10% to 21%."
2006-02-13
PUNO, J.
In view of their exalted position as keepers of public faith, court personnel are indeed saddled with a heavy burden of responsibility to the public.[41]  Hence, they must thoroughly avoid any impression of impropriety, misdeed or negligence in the performance of official duties.[42] For those who have fallen short of their accountabilities, we have not hesitated to impose the ultimate penalty.[43]  We will not tolerate or condone any conduct that violates the norms of public accountability and diminishes the faith of the people in the judicial system.  For, we cannot countenance any act or omission on the part of all those involved in the administration of justice which would diminish or even just tend to diminish the faith of the people in the judiciary.[44]
2005-08-09
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
In the Report on the Financial Audit in RTC, General Santos City and the RTC and MTC of Polomok, South Cotabato,[10] we emphasized the role of the Clerks of Court with regard to the collection of legal fees, thus:"xxx Clerks of Courts are the chief administrative officers of their respective courts; with regard to the collection of legal fees, they perform a delicate function as judicial officers entrusted with the correct and effective implementation of regulations thereon. Even the undue delay in the remittances of amounts collected by them at the very least constitutes misfeasance. On the otherhand, a vital administrative function of a judge is the effective management of his court and this includes control of the conduct of the court's ministerial officers. It should be brought home to both that the safekeeping of funds and collections is essential to the goal of an orderly administration of justice and no protestation of good faith can override the mandatory nature of the Circulars designed to promote full accountability for government funds."
2005-01-31
PER CURIAM
We find respondent Banting's explanation of stealth and deception on the part of Tuazon unsatisfactory.  As Clerk of Court, he has general supervision over all personnel of his court and was its cashier and disbursement officer (Section A[1] and Section B, Chapter VII, Manual for Clerks of Court).  As cashier and disbursement officer, it was his duty to collect and receive, by himself or through a duly appointed cashier, all monies in payment of all legal fees, as well as to receive deposits, fines and dues.[45] It devolves upon him to personally attend to the collection of the fees, the safekeeping of the money collected, the making of the proper entries thereof in the corresponding book of accounts, and the deposit of the same in the offices concerned.  The collection of legal fees, by its nature, is a delicate function of clerks of court as judicial officers entrusted with the correct and effective implementation of the regulations thereon.[46] He failed to properly supervise a subordinate.  Though it appears that Ms. Tuazon was the one in charge of collecting the fees and recording the transactions, it behooves respondent Banting to ensure Ms. Tuazon was performing her duties and responsibilities to the end that there is full compliance with circulars on deposits and collections.[47] This, he failed to do.