FACTS:

As a result of the examination of the cash and accounts of Atty. Claveria by State Auditor Sanano, he was found short of his cash accountability which he failed to satisfactorily explain. The Regional Office No. V of the COA submitted to the Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon a letter informing the latter that based on the findings of Auditor Sanano, Atty. Claveria appears guilty of Malversation of Public Funds and recommending the filing of appropriate criminal charges against Atty. Claveria.

In deference to the provisions of Section 6, Article VIII of the Constitution and in consonance with the rulings of the Supreme Court, the case was referred to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA). Subsequently, the OCA directed twice the respondent to file his comment. However, said orders were defied by the respondent.

Meanwhile, the Fiscal Monitoring Division, Court Management Office of the OCA (FMO-CMO) sent an Audit Team to conduct a financial audit on the books of account of the respondent and reported that there was indeed a shortage in the various court funds under his responsibility. It was also reported that Atty. Claveria admitted that he appropriated the missing funds for his personal use and expressed willingness to restitute the same.

The Court directed the FMO of the OCA to compute the actual amount of withheld salaries and other allowances of respondent and deduct therefrom the total amount of P284,397.63 to satisfy the shortage incurred by him and the Legal Office of the OCA to file the appropriate criminal charges against the respondent and to dismiss him from the service.

ISSUE:

Whether or not respondent is guilty of the charges against him.

RULING:

The respondent is found guilty of gross dishonesty, grave misconduct, and malversation of public funds. He is dismissed from the service with forfeiture of all his accrued retirement benefits, leave credits except those already earned, other privileges, if any, with prejudice to reemployment in any branch, agency or instrumentality of the government, including GOCC’s.

Furthermore, the Court find respondent guilty of Contempt of Court and he is fined the amount of P20,000.00 to be paid separately out of his earned leave credits for ignoring the directives to comment/answer and refute the truthfulness of the charges against him.

The failure of the respondent to turn over the money deposited with him and present evidence thereon constitute gross dishonesty, grave misconduct and malversation of public funds.

The High Court held that respondent failed to live up to the standards of honesty and integrity expected of an officer of the court. Those involved in the administration of justice from the highest official to the lowest clerk must live up to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service, bearing in mind that the image of a court of justice is necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and women who work thereat. Moreover, Clerk of Courts, being next in rank to judges in courts of justice, have been repeatedly warned that dishonesty, particularly that amounting to malversation of public funds, will not be countenanced as they definitely reduce the image of courts of justice to mere havens of thievery and corruption. As custodian of court funds and revenues, Clerk of Courts have always been reminded of their duty to immediately deposit the various funds received by them to the authorized government depositaries for they are not supposed to keep funds in their custody. The Court had never and will never tolerate nor condone any conduct which would violate the norms of public accountability, and diminish, or even tend to diminish, the faith of the people in the justice system.