Court Employee Dismissed for Faking Annulment Decision and Taking P150,000

The Supreme Court has sent a clear message to all court personnel: no one in the judiciary is above the exacting standards of honesty and integrity. In a 2019 en banc decision, the Court dismissed a court stenographer who took P150,000 from a litigant by promising to secure an annulment of marriage—then fabricated a fake court decision to cover up his scheme.

The case, Duque v. Calpo (A.M. No. P-16-3505, January 22, 2019), underscores that court employees who abuse their positions for personal gain face the ultimate administrative penalty: dismissal from service.

What Happened in This Case

The complainant, a member of the Philippine Coast Guard, met the respondent—a Court Stenographer III at the Regional Trial Court of Cavite City—through a common friend in September 2010. After learning about the complainant's marital problems, the stenographer volunteered his services to help secure an annulment order.

The complainant paid the stenographer P150,000 in three equal installments, with receipts duly signed by the respondent. The stenographer even accompanied the complainant to a psychologist in Mandaluyong City for the required examination.

Months passed with no progress. Then, in November 2011, the stenographer handed over what appeared to be a Decision from the RTC of Dasmariñas City, Branch 90, granting the annulment.

Suspicious, the complainant consulted a lawyer and verified the document. The discovery was alarming: no such case existed, the presiding judge had never issued that decision, and her signature was a forgery.

When confronted, the stenographer begged for mercy and promised to return the money. He never did.

The Administrative Charges

The complainant filed an administrative complaint for malfeasance, grave misconduct, dishonesty, and conduct unbecoming of a public official. During the investigation, the stenographer admitted receiving the P150,000 but claimed it went to processing fees, filing fees, and lawyer's fees. He denied handing over the fake decision.

The investigating judge and the Office of the Court Administrator both found him guilty of grave misconduct, recommending dismissal.

The Supreme Court's Ruling

The Supreme Court agreed. The Court defined misconduct as a transgression of an established rule of action, particularly unlawful behavior or gross negligence by a public officer. To be considered gross misconduct, the elements of corruption, clear intent to violate the law, or flagrant disregard of established rules must be present.

The Court also cited the definition of dishonesty as "a disposition to lie, cheat, deceive or defraud; untrustworthiness; lack of integrity."

The stenographer's actions checked every box. He deceived the complainant into believing he could obtain a favorable annulment decision. He collected money on that false promise. He falsified a court decision and forged a judge's signature.

The Court held that these acts "undeniably constitute grave misconduct and serious dishonesty." It emphasized that the principle of utmost honesty and integrity applies to every employee of the judiciary, from the judge down to the lowest-ranking personnel.

The Penalty

Under the Revised Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, grave misconduct and serious dishonesty are classified as grave offenses. The imposable penalty is dismissal from service.

The Rules further provide that dismissal carries with it:

• Cancellation of eligibility
• Forfeiture of retirement benefits (except accrued leave credits)
• Perpetual disqualification from holding public office
• A bar from taking civil service examinations

The Court ordered all of these, without prejudice to the filing of appropriate criminal and civil cases against the respondent.

Practical Takeaways

• Court employees cannot collect fees from litigants. Only authorized personnel can receive court fees, and only for legitimate purposes. Anyone offering to "facilitate" a case for personal payment is committing grave misconduct.
• Falsifying court documents is a career-ending offense. Forging a judge's signature and fabricating a decision constitute serious dishonesty, punishable by dismissal.
• The standard of integrity applies to all court personnel. From judges to stenographers and clerks, every employee of the judiciary must uphold the highest degree of honesty.
• Victims of court employee fraud have recourse. Administrative complaints may be filed with the Office of the Court Administrator, and criminal and civil cases may follow.
• Verify court decisions independently. Litigants who suspect a document's authenticity should consult a lawyer and verify the case with the issuing court.

This article is general information and not legal advice. For your specific situation, consult a lawyer or ask ASG Legal AI.