Chen v. Javalera-Sulit
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: Complainant Ang Kek Chen filed a verified complaint against Judge Cristina F. Javalera-Sulit and Stenographer Primitiva A. Caliao-Gloria of the Metropolitan Trial Court, Branch 27, Manila. The complaint stemmed from alleged misconduct in the transcription of stenographic notes from a March 26, 2004 hearing in Criminal Case No. 367476, where the complainant was the accused in a charge of unjust vexation. The complainant alleged delays in transcription, inaccuracies in the provided transcripts, and improper conduct by the respondents. Procedural History: The complainant filed an amended verified complaint and an erratum, detailing his grievances regarding the transcription of proceedings. He alleged that Stenographer Gloria failed to provide the transcript within the stipulated period and that the initial and revised versions contained inaccuracies. He also claimed Judge Sulit failed to act on his motions, refused to initiate disciplinary actions against other parties, and that certain orders were released prematurely. The case was investigated, and the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended dismissing the charges against Judge Sulit for lack of merit and reprimanding Stenographer Gloria for lack of prudence. The Supreme Court re-docketed the case as a regular administrative matter and required parties to submit for resolution based on pleadings. The Petition: The complainant's petition, in essence, sought disciplinary action against Judge Sulit and Stenographer Gloria for alleged serious or gross misconduct. Specifically, he accused them of failing to provide a faithful transcription of the March 26, 2004 proceedings, delaying the submission of the transcript, and producing divergent versions. He also alleged Judge Sulit's inaction on disciplinary measures against other individuals and irregularities in the release dates of court orders. The complainant requested that an expert stenographer be designated to verify the accuracy of the transcription and the audio recording, and that disciplinary actions be taken against the respondents. The Supreme Court, however, found the charges against Judge Sulit to be without merit and dismissed them, while imposing a fine on Stenographer Gloria for simple neglect of duty due to her imprudent release of an unofficial and inaccurate transcript.
Issue(s)
Whether Judge Cristina F. Javalera-Sulit committed serious or gross misconduct in relation to the transcription of stenographic notes and her actions concerning the criminal case, and whether the charges against her are meritorious. Whether Stenographer Primitiva A. Caliao-Gloria committed serious or gross misconduct in relation to the transcription of stenographic notes, including delay and inaccuracies, and whether the charges against her are meritorious.
Ruling
The charges against Judge Cristina F. Javalera-Sulit are DISMISSED for lack of merit. Stenographer Primitiva A. Caliao-Gloria is FINED Five Thousand Pesos (₱5,000.00) for SIMPLE NEGLECT OF DUTY and WARNED to be more circumspect in the performance of her duties.
Ratio Decidendi
On the charges against Judge Cristina F. Javalera-Sulit: The Court found no merit in the allegations against Judge Sulit. Her issuance of an Order dated April 28, 2004, directing Gloria to transcribe the proceedings within five days, and her subsequent Order dated June 1, 2004, allowing the complainant to file a motion for correction of any inaccuracies in the TSN, demonstrated that she acted appropriately. The Court noted that the complainant refused to avail himself of the remedy provided by Judge Sulit and instead insisted on pursuing the administrative case. The allegations regarding the release of orders prior to their issuance dates were sufficiently explained by certifications from the Branch Clerk of Court and the Clerk-In-Charge. The claim that Judge Sulit raised her voice was uncorroborated and appeared only in an amended complaint. The imputation of influence on Justice Marigomen was baseless. The Court emphasized that administrative complaints against judges must be supported by sufficient proof, and unfounded accusations that trifle with the judicial process will not be countenanced. Judge Sulit's unblemished record and nomination for Judicial Excellence Awards further supported the dismissal of the charges. On the charges against Stenographer Primitiva A. Caliao-Gloria: The Court agreed that Gloria should be disciplined. She allowed her daughter-in-law, a trainee, to transcribe her notes without the judge's knowledge or approval, and permitted the complainant to obtain a copy of this unofficial and inaccurate transcript. This action, regardless of the complainant's insistence, was improper and led to the complainant's misgivings. Furthermore, Gloria failed to comply with Administrative Circular No. 24-90, which requires stenographers to transcribe notes within 20 days from the time they were taken. The hearing was on March 26, 2004, making the TSN due by April 15, 2004, but it was only finished on May 20, 2004, over a month late. Her defense that the next hearing was months away did not exculpate her, as the administrative circular's directive is clear and any extension requires judicial recommendation and OCA approval. The Court classified Gloria's infractions as simple neglect of duty. Considering her long service and it being her first offense, a fine of ₱5,000.00 was deemed sufficient, along with a warning.
Main Doctrine
A court stenographer who releases an unofficial and inaccurate transcript of stenographic notes, prepared by a trainee, and fails to submit the official transcript within the prescribed period, commits simple neglect of duty. The judge, however, is not liable for failing to act on motions related to the transcription if appropriate remedies were provided to the complainant.