Dojillo, Jr. vs. Ching

Falsification of a Daily Time Record (DTR) constitutes dishonesty and fraud involving government funds, warranting suspension or dismissal, though mitigating circumstances may reduce the penalty; further, judges must employ gender-fair language and avoid intemperate, discriminatory remarks in their pleadings.

Judge Jaime L. Dojillo, Jr. and Concepcion Z. Ching, Clerk of Court, worked together at the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Manaoag, Pangasinan. Animosity developed between them, culminating in mutual accusations of misconduct, immorality, and inefficiency.

• Judge's Complaint: Judge Dojillo charged Ching with gross misconduct for gossiping about an alleged illicit affair between him and a court interpreter, banging the office door, and issuing death threats. He also charged her with gross incompetence for delegating her typing tasks and causing delays, violating the smoking ban, conduct unbecoming for loitering, and gross dishonesty for falsifying her Daily Time Record (DTR) for November 2003 and December 2005. In his pleadings, Dojillo repeatedly emphasized Ching's sexual orientation, referring to her as a "lesbian" and a "dirty gossiper."
• Clerk's Counter-Complaint: Ching denied the charges and countered that Judge Dojillo was having an illicit affair with Interpreter Erlinda Marmolejo. Ching claimed she saw Marmolejo exiting the judge's chambers early in the morning looking as if she had just woken up, and that the two were frequently seen arriving and leaving together. Regarding the DTR falsification, Ching claimed December 12, 2005 was a local holiday and rest day due to the Galicayo Festival, and that employees agreed to reflect this in their DTRs.
• Attempted Settlement: Both parties moved to dismiss their respective charges, claiming the complaints arose from a pure misunderstanding. The OCA recommended denying the motion, asserting that withdrawal does not divest the Court of jurisdiction over administrative cases.
• DTR Falsification Issue: To refute Ching's claim that December 12, 2005 was a local holiday, the Human Resource Management officer of Manaoag executed an affidavit stating it was a regular working day. A Municipal Consultant executed a counter-affidavit claiming the municipal hall was closed. The Court found the HR officer's affidavit more credible, noting the consultant was not required to report daily and only reported on paydays.

• Gross Misconduct: Judge Dojillo argued that Ching was a gossiper and troublemaker who spread malicious rumors about his alleged affair with a court interpreter, banged doors in the office, and issued death threats.
• Inefficiency and Incompetence: Petitioner maintained that Ching neglected her duties, refused to learn how to type or use the computer, and frequently loitered outside the office, causing delays in the issuance of writs of execution.
• Dishonesty: Petitioner argued that Ching falsified her DTRs by claiming she was present on November 11, 2003 when she was actually in Manila, and by falsely representing December 12, 2005 as a local holiday to excuse her absence.
• Immorality (Counter-Claim by Ching): Ching argued that Judge Dojillo was guilty of immorality for having an illicit affair with Interpreter Marmolejo, claiming she witnessed Marmolejo exiting the judge's chambers early in the morning in a disheveled state.

• Denial of Misconduct: Ching countered that she was a warm person with strong convictions for propriety, denied being a rumor monger, and claimed the door was slammed because it was bigger than the jamb.
• Justification of Duties: Respondent argued that her duties as clerk of court were administrative and supervisory, justifying the delegation of typing tasks to faster staff. She attributed the delay in writs to the judge's failure to release signed orders.
• Defense Against Dishonesty: Ching maintained that she decided not to push through with her November 2003 leave, and that December 12, 2005 was a local holiday and rest day, an arrangement agreed upon by court employees and approved by the presiding judge.
• Refutation of Immorality: Judge Dojillo denied the illicit affair, explaining that Marmolejo entered his chambers to use the computer for work-related reasons, and that 8:00 AM was regular office hours. He also justified giving Marmolejo rides as her residence was along his route home.

• Administrative Liability of Ching: Whether Concepcion Ching is guilty of dishonesty and falsification of official documents for making false entries in her Daily Time Record.
• Administrative Liability of Judge Dojillo: Whether Judge Dojillo is guilty of immorality based on Ching's allegations.
• Propriety of Judge's Language: Whether Judge Dojillo's use of derogatory and gender-specific language in his pleadings warrants administrative sanction.

• Administrative Liability of Ching: Ching was found guilty of dishonesty and falsification. Falsifying a DTR to cover up absences constitutes fraud involving government funds, as it enables an employee to receive salary and earn leave credits for services never rendered. While dishonesty and falsification are grave offenses punishable by dismissal even for the first offense under the Uniform Rules, the penalty was reduced to six months' suspension owing to the mitigating circumstance that this was her first administrative charge since entering government service in 1996.
• Administrative Liability of Judge Dojillo: The immorality charge against Judge Dojillo was dismissed for lack of substantial evidence. Marmolejo's presence in the chambers was adequately explained by work-related reasons (the computer was inside), and 8:00 AM constitutes regular office hours. Giving a colleague a ride home was also found to be devoid of immorality.
• Propriety of Judge's Language: Judge Dojillo was admonished for using intemperate and discriminatory language. Emphasizing Ching's sexual orientation by calling her a "lesbian" and using phrases like "satanic belief of dirty gossiper" was uncalled for, as the complained acts could be committed regardless of gender orientation. Judges must demonstrate finesse and use guarded, measured, and gender-fair language.

• Withdrawal of Administrative Complaint — The withdrawal of an administrative complaint or the execution of an affidavit of desistance does not divest the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction to investigate the matters alleged, because the purpose of administrative proceedings is to protect the public service, based on the principle that public office is a public trust.
• Falsification of DTR as Dishonesty — Each false entry in a Daily Time Record constitutes falsification and dishonesty. It constitutes fraud involving government funds because the DTR is used to determine salary and leave credits; falsifying it automatically results in financial losses to the government by enabling an employee to receive compensation for services never rendered.
• Mitigating Circumstances in Administrative Cases — While dishonesty and falsification of official documents are grave offenses punishable by dismissal even for the first offense, the Court may impose a lesser penalty of suspension in light of mitigating factors such as length of service, first offense, or remorse.

• "The withdrawal of the complaint or the execution of an affidavit of desistance does not automatically result in the dismissal of the administrative case. x x x It will not divest the Supreme Court of its jurisdiction to investigate the matters alleged in the complaint."
• "Dishonesty is a serious offense which has no place in the judiciary. Each false entry in the DTR constitutes falsification and dishonesty. The falsification of a DTR constitutes fraud involving government funds."
• "Being called to dispense justice, Judge Dojillo must demonstrate finesse in his choice of words as normally expected of men of his stature. His language, both written and spoken, must be guarded and measured lest the best of intentions be misconstrued."

• De Vera v. Rimas, A.M. No. P-06-2118, June 12, 2008, 554 SCRA 253 — Cited to support the principle that dishonesty is a serious offense that has no place in the judiciary.
• Report on the Attendance in Office of Mr. Glenn B. Hufalar, A.M. No. 04-10-296-MTCC, July 28, 2008, 560 SCRA 14 — Cited for the rule that each false entry in the DTR constitutes falsification and dishonesty.
• Flores v. Hon. Layosa, 479 Phil. 1020 (2004) — Cited to explain that falsifying a DTR results in financial losses to the government by enabling an employee to receive salary for unrendered services.
• Re: Administrative Case for Falsification of Official Documents and Dishonesty against Randy S. Villanueva, A.M. No. 2005-24-SC, August 10, 2007, 529 SCRA 679; Servino v. Adolfo, A.M. No. P-06-2204, November 30, 2006, 509 SCRA 42 — Cited as instances where the Court did not impose the penalty of dismissal due to the presence of mitigating factors such as length of service and remorse.
• Negros Grace Pharmacy, Inc. v. Judge Hilario, 461 Phil. 843 (2003) — Cited to emphasize that judges must demonstrate finesse in their choice of words.
• De la Cruz v. Judge Bersamira, 402 Phil. 671 (2001) — Cited for the requirement that a judge's language, both written and spoken, must be guarded and measured.

• Rule IV, Section 52(A)(1) & (6), Uniform Rules on Administrative Cases in the Civil Service Commission (CSC Resolution No. 99-1936) — Classifies dishonesty and falsification of official documents as grave offenses carrying the penalty of dismissal even on the first offense. Applied to establish the baseline penalty for Ching's infractions before consideration of mitigating circumstances.
• Canon 5, New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary (A.M. No. 03-05-01-SC) — Requires judges to demonstrate finesse and propriety in their conduct and language. Applied to admonish Judge Dojillo for his use of offensive and non-gender-fair language in his complaint.

Leonardo A. Quisumbing (Chairperson), Minita V. Chico-Nazario, Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado M. Peralta.