SC disbars LP candidate over graft and malversation

Supreme Court of the Philippines. FILE PHOTO

The Supreme Court has dismissed from service and disbarred a Liberal Party candidate running for Vice Mayor of Dapitan City in Zamboanga del Norte.

In a 15-page per curiam (anonymous) decision, the high court dismissed from service Makati City Regional Trial Court Branch 61 Judge Joseph Cedrick O. Ruiz who was convicted in 2013 for graft and malversation by the Sandiganbayan for conspiring with a police officer to facilitate the withdrawal of P1-million from public funds when he was still Dapitan City Mayor.

The high court also ordered the disbarment and forfeiture of all his benefits except accrued leave credits. Furthermore, Ruiz is perpetually disqualified from reemployment in the government or any of its subdivisions, instrumentalities or agencies including government-owned and controlled corporations.

Ruiz was sentenced by the Sandiganbayan of up to 8 years imprisonment for violation of the Anti-Graft law  and up to 18 year imprisonment for Malversation. He was also fined P950,000 equivalent to the amount malversed and ordered to indemnify the city of Dapitan the sum of P950,000, plus interest.

Records showed that for the period from June 30, 1998 to June 30, 2001, Ruiz allowed Police Inspector Pepe E. Nortal to request, for and on his behalf, the withdrawal as cash advance the amount of P1 million from the CIF appropriated under the Office of the City Mayor for fiscal year 2001 “to address the peace and order situation of Dapitan City.”

Nortal testified that Ruiz could not make the cash advance himself as he had not liquidated his previous cash releases. Of the amount, P50,000 was handed to Nortal for the PNP expenses.

In convicting Ruiz, the Sandiganbayan stated that the timing of the P1-million cash advance was suspect as it was done on May 16, 2001 or five days after the May 11, 2001 elections, where he lost his bid for re-election.

“Accused Ruiz’s failure to satisfactorily explain where the money went is sufficient to conclude that he converted the same for his personal use,” the ruling stated.

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) received a copy of the Sandiganbayan ruling and treated it as an administrative matter against Ruiz.

In its recommendation, OCA, which has administrative supervision against all courts and court personnel nationwide initially recommended Ruiz’s suspension.

It noted that Ruiz’s conviction involves moral turpitude classified as a serious charge under the Rules of Court. The recommendation was eventually granted by the Supreme Court and suspended him without pay.

In its recent ruling, the high court dismissed the Ruiz’s claim that the administrative case against him is premature because his case is still pending before the Supreme Court.

“We placed the respondent under preventive suspension because he is alleged to have committed transgressions that are classified as serious under the Rules of Court,” the high court said.

It added that Ruiz’s denial cannot stand against the positive declarations of the prosecution witnesses, which are supported by the documents. It added that Ruiz had even failed to substantiate his claim that the charges against him had been politically motivated.

The high court cited that there was substantial evidence that Ruiz actively worked for the approval of the P1-million cash advance from the Central Intelligence Fund (CIF) allotted for the Mayor’s Office; and that he facilitated the withdrawal of the P1 million by one P/Insp. Pepe Nortal; and that the respondent judge received and used this withdrawn amount for his personal benefit.

“Considering the nature and extent of the respondent’s transgressions, we find the imposition of the supreme administrative penalty of dismissal to be appropriate,” the court said.

The high court stressed that its task in the administrative case at bar was not to determine the correctness of the Sandiganbayan’s ruling but to determine only whether substantial evidence exists to hold the respondent administratively liable for acts he is alleged to have committed while he was still the mayor of Dapitan City. It noted “that only substantial evidence is required to support our conclusions in administrative proceedings.”

“We emphasize that judges should be the embodiment of competence, integrity, and independence, and their conduct should be above reproach. They must adhere to exacting standards of morality, decency, and probity. A magistrate is judged, not only by his official acts, but also by his private morality and actions,” the Court said.

Justice Lucas P. Bersamin wrote a separate dissenting opinion saying “that this administrative matter may be prematurely adjudicated in the light of the pending appeal by the respondent of his convictions.” RAM

RELATED STORIES

Sandigan dismisses LP allies’ graft rap in Bohol over inordinate delay

Aquino ally in Cagayan de Oro City sacked