The Clerk of Court’s Responsibility for Safekeeping Exhibits

A.M. No. P-96-1185, June 26, 2000

Imagine a scenario where crucial evidence in a criminal case goes missing from a courthouse. The implications could be devastating, potentially jeopardizing the prosecution and undermining the integrity of the justice system. Who is responsible when such a loss occurs? This question lies at the heart of a Supreme Court case that clarifies the duties and liabilities of court personnel in safeguarding exhibits.

This case revolves around the loss of firearms and ammunition that were evidence in criminal cases from the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Catbalogan, Samar. The Supreme Court had to determine who should be held accountable for this loss, specifically focusing on the responsibility of the Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the Office of the Branch Clerk of Court.

Understanding the Clerk of Court’s Duty of Safekeeping

In the Philippine legal system, the Clerk of Court plays a vital role in the administration of justice. One of their primary responsibilities is the safekeeping of all court records, papers, files, exhibits, and public property committed to their charge. This duty is enshrined in Section 7, Rule 136 of the Rules of Court, which states that clerks are responsible for all properties submitted to the court.

This duty extends beyond simply storing the exhibits. It encompasses a proactive approach to ensuring their safety and integrity. The Clerk of Court must implement and oversee procedures for proper documentation, storage, and retrieval of exhibits. They must also ensure that exhibits are handled in accordance with existing rules and regulations, such as Supreme Court Circular No. 2, which mandates the turnover of firearms used as evidence to the nearest Constabulary Command after the termination of the case.

To illustrate, consider a hypothetical situation where a Clerk of Court receives a valuable piece of jewelry as evidence in a theft case. Their duty is not only to store the jewelry securely but also to document its receipt, maintain a chain of custody, and ensure that it is properly returned to the rightful owner at the conclusion of the case. Failure to do so could expose the Clerk of Court to administrative liability.

Supreme Court Circular No. 2, dated May 13, 1983, explicitly directs Clerks of Court to turn over firearms used as evidence in criminal cases to the nearest Constabulary Command (now the Philippine National Police) after the cases have been terminated. The circular states:

“[Y]ou are hereby DIRECTED to turn over, effective immediately, to the nearest Constabulary Command all firearms in your custody after the cases involving such firearms shall have been terminated.”

The Case of the Missing Firearms

In early 1993, a steel safe in the office of Judge Sibanah E. Usman of the RTC of Catbalogan, Samar, was forcibly opened, resulting in the loss of several items, including four .38 caliber revolvers and five empty M-16 shells. These items were evidence in concluded criminal cases.

The incident triggered an investigation to determine who was responsible for the loss. The investigation focused on several court personnel, including Julius G. Cabe, the Sheriff IV and Officer-in-Charge (OIC) of the Office of the Branch Clerk of Court.

The procedural journey involved several key steps:

• Judge Usman reported the incident to the Executive Judge.
• The Executive Judge informed the Court Administrator.
• An investigation was conducted, initially focusing on several court personnel.
• The investigation eventually centered on Julius G. Cabe, the OIC of the Branch Clerk of Court.
• The Court Administrator filed an administrative case against Cabe.

Cabe argued that he was not aware of the existence of the firearms and that another employee was responsible for their safekeeping. However, the Supreme Court ultimately found him liable for neglect of duty.

The Supreme Court emphasized the importance of the Clerk of Court’s role in safeguarding court exhibits, stating:

“It is the duty of the Clerk of Court to keep safely all records, papers, files, exhibits and public property committed to his charge.”

The Court further elaborated on the responsibilities of the OIC, stating:

“Respondent, being the then OIC of the Office of the Branch Clerk of Court, RTC Branch 28, Catbalogan, Samar, he was responsible for ensuring the efficient and timely recording, filing and over-all management of court records, including the safe-keeping of exhibits, documents and all properties of the said branch, subject only to the supervision and control of the Presiding Judge.”

Practical Implications for Court Personnel and the Public

This ruling has significant implications for court personnel, particularly Clerks of Court and those acting in similar capacities. It underscores the importance of taking a proactive and responsible approach to the safekeeping of court exhibits. Clerks of Court must implement robust procedures for inventory, storage, and disposal of exhibits, and they must ensure that all personnel under their supervision are aware of and comply with these procedures.

The ruling also serves as a reminder to the public of the importance of maintaining the integrity of the justice system. The loss of evidence can have serious consequences, potentially jeopardizing the outcome of criminal cases and undermining public confidence in the courts.

Key Lessons:

• Clerks of Court have a primary responsibility for the safekeeping of all court exhibits.
• This responsibility includes implementing and overseeing procedures for proper documentation, storage, and disposal of exhibits.
• Clerks of Court must comply with existing rules and regulations, such as Supreme Court Circular No. 2, regarding the turnover of firearms.
• Failure to fulfill these duties can result in administrative liability.

Frequently Asked Questions

Q: What is the role of the Clerk of Court?

A: The Clerk of Court is an essential officer of the court responsible for administrative tasks, including managing records, handling exhibits, and ensuring the smooth operation of court proceedings.

Q: What does safekeeping of exhibits entail?

A: Safekeeping involves properly documenting, storing, and managing all evidence submitted to the court to prevent loss, damage, or tampering.

Q: What happens if a Clerk of Court fails to safeguard exhibits?

A: Failure to safeguard exhibits can lead to administrative sanctions, including fines, suspension, or even dismissal from service.

Q: What is Supreme Court Circular No. 2?

A: Supreme Court Circular No. 2 mandates that all firearms used as evidence in criminal cases be turned over to the nearest Constabulary Command (now the PNP) after the case is terminated.

Q: Who is ultimately responsible for the actions of subordinates in the Clerk of Court’s office?

A: The Branch Clerk of Court is chiefly responsible for the shortcomings of subordinates to whom administrative functions have been delegated.

Q: What should a Clerk of Court do if they discover that exhibits are missing?

A: The Clerk of Court should immediately report the loss to the Presiding Judge and initiate an investigation to determine the cause of the loss and prevent future occurrences.

Q: Can a Clerk of Court delegate their responsibility for safekeeping exhibits?

A: While certain tasks can be delegated, the ultimate responsibility for safekeeping exhibits remains with the Clerk of Court.

Q: What is the consequence of failing to comply with Circular No. 2?

A: Failure to comply with Circular No. 2 and turn over firearms can lead to administrative liability, especially if the firearms are lost as a result.

ASG Law specializes in civil and criminal litigation. Contact us or email hello@asglawpartners.com to schedule a consultation.