Neglect of Duty in Court Clerks' Responsibility for Safekeeping Exhibits

The Supreme Court has long held that court employees carry a heavy burden of responsibility in dispensing justice. A 2017 ruling underscores this duty, particularly for clerks of court who serve as custodians of court records and exhibits. In Botigan-Santos v. Gener (A.M. No. P-16-3521, September 4, 2017), the Court found a clerk of court guilty of simple neglect of duty after two firearms used as evidence in terminated criminal cases were lost while in the court's custody.

The Facts of the Case

Judge Maria Cristina C. Botigan-Santos of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of San Ildefonso, Bulacan reported a robbery that occurred in her court on August 7, 2014. During the investigation, it was discovered that aside from stolen money belonging to court employees, the court also lost two.38 caliber firearms that served as exhibits in two criminal cases.

Notably, both criminal cases had been dismissed or terminated for over sixteen (16) years before the robbery. Despite this, the MTC kept possession of the firearms. The police authorities failed to identify the perpetrator of the robbery.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended that the matter be treated as a formal administrative complaint against Clerk of Court Leticia C. Gener.

The Clerk of Court's Defense

In her defense, respondent Gener argued that she was not formally apprised of the physical custody of the exhibits or of the termination of the cases in 1998. She claimed that she regularly conducted inventory of properties under her custody but was unaware the missing firearms were exhibits of terminated cases due to lack of formal turnover.

She also alleged that she thought a formal proceeding was necessary to dispose of or turn over the firearms to the Philippine National Police (PNP), which she claimed could not be done before the robbery because a new presiding judge had just been appointed.

The Ruling: Simple Neglect of Duty

The Supreme Court found the complaint meritorious. The Court ruled that the respondent failed to meet the requirements expected of her as a clerk of court.

Section 7, Rule 136 of the Rules of Court explicitly provides that the clerk shall safely keep all records, papers, files, exhibits, and public property committed to his or her charge. The Court emphasized that the clerk of court is the administrative officer of the court and has control and supervision over all court records.

The Court did not give credence to the respondent's claim that she was unaware of the exhibits. If she had been regularly conducting inventory as she claimed, she could not have missed firearms that had been sitting in a cabinet for more than 15 years.

The Court also cited the 2002 Revised Manual for Clerks of Court, which directs courts to turn over to the PNP all firearms in their custody after the cases involving such firearms have been terminated. The respondent's failure to comply with this directive for more than 15 years after the cases were dismissed clearly violated established procedures.

The Penalty

Under Section 52(B)(1) of the Revised Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service, simple neglect of duty is a less grave offense punishable by suspension of one (1) month and one (1) day to six (6) months for the first offense. The Court found that a three-month suspension was appropriate.

However, considering the OCA's recommendation that suspension could hamper the performance of court work, the Court instead imposed a fine equivalent to three months' salary. The respondent was also sternly warned that commission of the same or similar offense in the future would be dealt with more severely.

Practical Takeaways

• Clerks of court are strictly liable for exhibits and records in their custody. The duty to safely keep all court property is explicit in the Rules of Court and cannot be excused by lack of formal turnover or awareness.
• Regular inventory is a mandatory duty. Conducting periodic inventory of dockets, records, and exhibits is essential. Failure to do so may constitute neglect of duty.
• Dispose of exhibits promptly after case termination. The Revised Manual for Clerks of Court prescribes specific procedures for disposing of exhibits, including turning over firearms to the PNP after cases are terminated.
• Ignorance of procedures is not a valid defense. Court employees are expected to know and comply with established rules and guidelines in the performance of their duties.
• Length of service is not a mitigating circumstance. On the contrary, long-serving employees are expected to be more efficient and knowledgeable in managing court records and exhibits.

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