NATIONAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION, COMPLAINANT, VS. ROLANDO SAA, CLERK OF COURT, RESPONDENT.

In a sworn complaint filed with complainant National Bureau of
Investigation (NBI), Mayor Rolando O. Esturas of the Municipality of Capalonga,
Camarines Norte charged respondent Rolando Saa, Clerk of Court of the Municipal
Circuit Trial Court of Capalonga, Camarines Norte with Dereliction of Duty for
playing mahjong almost daily during office hours in the afternoon of regular
working days.

The NBI applied for, and was granted by, the Office of the
Ombudsman clearance to investigate the case.

On May 29, 1989, the NBI dispatched Senior Agent Manuel Briones
together with Security Officer Roberto Vale and photographer Bonifacio Acosta
to Capalonga, Camarines Norte and placed respondent Saa under surveillance.

On May 30, 1989 at around 1:00 o’clock in the afternoon, the NBI
agents saw respondent playing mahjong but were unable to take pictures of the
incident because of a curtain barring the photographer’s view.

The following day, the NBI agents succeeded in taking clear
photographs of respondent playing mahjong.

On September 12, 1990, the Court acting upon the letter and
evaluation report of the NBI, resolved to refer the case to the Executive Judge
for investigation, report and recommendation.

Thereafter, Executive Judge Luis D. Dictado submitted his report
on the subject administrative matter, pertinent portion of which reads:

“x x x Bonifacio Acosta (NBI Photographer) testified that he
was in Capalonga on May 30, 1989 (Tuesday), he looked around for a place where
he could take a good picture of the subject Rolando Saa playing mahjong but he
was not able to take pictures because of a curtain that blocked the view; but
on May 31, 1989 (Wednesday), between 1:00 and 2:00 o’clock in the afternoon, he
was able to take pictures of subject Rolando Saa; he also identified his
affidavit on the surveillance activity; after taking pictures on the respondent
Rolando Saa, they went to the Police Station and went back to Daet.

“Respondent Rolando Saa on the other hand testified that on
May 30, 1989 at about 1:00 o’clock in the afternoon, Mayor Esturas went to his
office and requested him to play for him at a mahjong game. He played mahjong at 3:00 to 3:30 p.m. which
included his coffee break. The same was
repeated the next day at the same hour. He acceded to the request to play mahjong because Mayor Esturas who
requested him had some visitors to attend to. He did not know that he was being trapped by Mayor Esturas for political
vendetta. No evidence contradicted his
claim. In fact, Mayor Esturas,
notwithstanding the subpoena issued to him, and who, according to respondent,
was duly received by his wife although the return does not say so, did not come
to testify in the case. So with Jimmy
Gonzales whose affidavit says he played with Rolando Saa on May 30, 1989 and in
the past. But be that as it may,
Rolando Saa has admitted playing mahjong on May 30 and 31, 1989 during office
hours. For his bold and honest
admission of guilt which he did at the request by (sic) no other than the
complaining town executive, the same may mitigate his guilt.

“WHEREFORE, in the the light of the evidence, respondent has been
proven to have violated existing civil service rules by playing mahjong during
office hours. However, considering that
respondent was merely trapped into playing mahjong by no other than complainant
Mayor Esturas of the town whom he looked upon as his superior, and the fact
that this is his first offense, it is recommended that he be punished a fine
equivalent to ONE (1) month salary with censure and a severe warning that a
repetition of the same act will mean an outright dismissal from the service.”
(Rollo, pp. 46-47)

After a perusal of the records of this case, the Court finds
itself in full accord with the findings and recommendation of Investigating
Judge Luis Dictado.

We echo once more the pronouncement made by this Court on the
values expected from court employees in the performance of their duties, to
wit:

“xxx The administration of justice is a sacred task. By the very nature of their duties, all
those involved in it must faithfully adhere to, hold inviolate, and invigorate
the principle solemnly enshrined in the
1987 Constitution that a public office is a public trust; and all public
officers and employees must at all times be accountable to the people, serve
them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency”
(Mirano v. Saavedra, 225 SCRA 77 [1993]).

WHEREFORE, the Court finds respondent Rolando Saa Guilty
of Dereliction of Duty and Resolved to impose upon him a FINE equivalent to one (1) month
salary with censure and warning that a repetition of the same offense shall be
dealt with more severely.

SO ORDERED.

Feliciano, (Chairman), Romero, Melo, and Vitug, JJ., concur.