,.

3Republir of tbe flbilipptnes

$>upretne <!Court
;fflllnniln

FIRST DIVISION

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames:

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution

dated July 23, 2014 which reads as follows:

'~ A.M.
No. 12-5-39-MTCC (Failure to Secure Authority
to Travel Abroad by Mike K. Mayor, MTCC-OCC, Cebu City).
-On 14 March to 29 July 2011, Mike K. Mayor, Records Officer I of the
Office of the Clerk of Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC),
Cebu City, took a trip to Dublin, Ireland without an authority to travel
abroad. Records show that on 17 February 2011, he filed an application for
a vacation leave to be spent abroad for the period 14 March to 29 July
2011, and attached thereto was his letter-request for the issuance of a travel
authority. The Executive Judge of the MTCC, Cebu City, recommended
the approval of his leave application. On 1 March 2011, Rosemarie S.
Pabatao, officer-in-charge of the Regional Court Administrator Office
(RCAO) 7, approved his leave application for 62 days of vacation leave
with leave pay, 3 days of special leave with pay, and 33 days of leave
1
without pay. Mr. Mayor's request and its supporting documents were
forwarded to the Office of Court Administrator (OCA) through an
1ndorsement2 dated 28 February 2011, but these were received by the
Employees Leave Division (ELD), Office of Administrative Services
(OAS) of the OCA on 4 March 2011 only. 3
4
In a letter dated 2 September 2011, Deputy Court Administrator
(DCA) Raul Bautista Villanueva directed Mr. Mayor to explain in writing
the latter's failure to secure an authority to travel abroad in violation of
paragraph b, nos. 1 and 2 of OCA Circular No. 49-2003 (Guidelines on
Requests for Travel Abroad and Extensions for Travel/Stay Abroad).
Additionally, rytr. Mayor was informed that his application for vacation

1
Rollo, pp. 19-25.
2
1d. at 19.
1
1d. at 8.
4
1d.atl0-ll. - over - five (5) pages ..... .
235
 .,
RESOLUTION 2 A.M. No. 12-5-39-MTC C
July 23, 2014

leave had been disapproved for his failure to comply with this circular, and
that his absences were therefore considered unauthorized. 5

Prior thereto, Mr. Mayor submitted a letter6 dated 16 August 2011 to

Atty. Chev in Q. Vasquez, Assistant Regional Court Administrator for
Administrative Services, RCAO 7, in relation to his request for the
reinstatement of his salary, which was cut off beginning 1 July 2011. The
letter also served as his written explanation in compliance with the
directive issued by DCA Villanueva.

Mr. Mayor explained that he proceeded with his travel to Dublin

without waiting for the approval of his leave application and request for
authority to travel, because his wife was sick and urgently needed his care.
His wife was working as a caregiver in Dublin, but she was afflicted with
metastatic cervical cancer and had to undergo chemo and radio therapy.
Thus, he took a.1 emergency leave of absence from work, and he even had
to leave tl1eir 13-year-old child to the care of a neighbor so he could attend
to his wife. 7

Further, he explained that he received his approved visa from the

Irish Consulate only in February 2011. His approved visa was set to expire
on 14 March 2011, so he bought a round-trip ticket in the first week of
March. He did not cancel his ticket because he urgently needed to leave,
and a cancellation would have made his trip more costly. He apologized for
his infraction and asked for the Court's kind understanding and
consideration. 8

Attached to the explanation of Mr. Mayor was a letter from Dr.

Laura MacKenzie of Morehampton Clinic, 136 Morehampton Road,
Dublin, confirming that Ruby Mayor, wife of Mike Mayor, had undergone
major treatment for metastatic cervical cancer and that the latter went to
Ireland to take care of his wife from March to end of July 2011. 9

In an Indorsement 10 dated l December 201 J, Atty. Caridad A.

Pabello, Chief of OCA Administrative Services, referred Mr. Mayor's
letter-explanation to the OCA Legal Office for appropriate action.

In its report to the Court dated 17 April 2012, the OCA

recommended that Mr. Mayor be found guilty of violation of OCA Circular
No. 49-2003 and Supreme Court Circular No. 55-97 in relation to the
Court's En Banc Resolution dated 1 February 2011 in A . M. No. 09-7-03
(Setting of the Maximum Period of Vacation Leave of Lower Court
5
1d. at 10.
c'ld. at 13-25.
7
1d. at 13.
8
ld. at 14.
9
Id. at 17. - over -
10
Jd. at 28.
235
RESOLUTION 3 A.M. No. 12-5-39-MTC C
July 23, 2014

Officials and Personnel). 11 The OCA also considered as aggravating

circumstance his unauthorized absences, which totalled 96.5 days. Thus, it
recommended a fine in the amount of three thousand pesos (P3,000) as
penalty, instead of a mere reprimand.

Whilst there have been dissenting opinions in recently decided cases

involving a similar infraction on the ground that the requirement for
authority to travel abroad impairs the employee's constitutional right to
travel, the Court will have to deal with the instant case since OCA Circular
No. 49-2003 has not yet been fully reversed.

OCA Circular No. 49-2003 directs judges and court personnel to

submit the complete requirements for applications for authority to travel
abroad two weeks before the intended departure; otherwise the application
shall be denied. Failure to secure a travel authority shall also be a ground
for disciplinary action. In relation to this circular, the Court En Banc in its
Resolution in A.M. No. 09-7-03-0 (Amended) dated 1 February 2011, has
set the maximum period for a vacation leave of absence of officials and
employees of the Judiciary, including the extension thereof, to thirty (30)
working days, except in cases of study leave/scholarship grant or sick leave
with a medical certificate. This policy on foreign travels of court personnel
has been reiterated in Supreme Court Memorandum Order No. 32-11, dated
20 September 2011, in which the Court has declared that applications for
leave of absence for travel outside the country without the required
permission or authority shall be denied.

Mr. Mayor applied for travel authority and submitted the

requirements therefor within the prescribed period of two weeks, as shown
by the favorable indorsement thereof dated 28 February 2011. Moreover,
he filed his application for a vacation leave and its suppmting documents
more than three weeks before the effectivity date of his leave. 12 It cannot be
reasonably said, then, that Mr. Mayor was noncompliant with the Court's
policy on foreign travels.

Mr. Mayor cannot be held liable for the apparent delay in the
transmittal of his application for travel authority to the OCA, without proof
of contributory delay on his part. Indeed, OCA Circular No. 49-2003
contains an express caveat that applications received by the OCA less than
two weeks before the intended travel shall not be favorably acted upon.
However, it should not serve as a ground to hold Mr. Mayor liable because
the records clearly show that his application has been timely indorsed by
RCAO 7.

11
ld.atl-6.
12
OCA Circular No. 6-03, dated 9 January 2003, directs the submission of application for vacation leave
five (5) days before the effectivity date of the intended leave.

- over-
235
RESOLUTION 4 A.M. No. 12-5-39-MTC C
July 23. 2014

Even if the processing period be reckoned from the date of the

OCA's actual receipt of the Indorsement, which was 4 March 2011, in this
age of technology it cannot reasonably be concluded that the OCA was left
with very little time to evaluate the request for travel authority, and that its
failure to immediately act thereon was justified. The leave application
clearly indicated the urgency of the reason for the travel abroad, which was
to enable Mr. Mayor to take care of his ailing wife. Worse, the date of the
Indorsement was visibly written on its face. Given these circumstances, it
cannot be said that his decision to leave the country without a travel
authority was an imprudent judgment call and a censurable act.

It appears, too, that the disapproval of the leave application was

grounded on his failure to secure a travel authority. Since the Court finds
that he is not liable for that failure, the OCA's recommendation to consider
his unauthorized absences as an aggravating circumstance must be rejected.
Moreover, as the records show that he had earned 62 days of vacation leave
credits as of J 7 February 2011 and that the RCAO 7 had approved his
application for a vacation leave of 98 days, the Court has no basis for
declaring his 'bsences unauthorized. In the light of the reason for his
absences, whic''1 is duly supported by a medical ce11ificate from his wife's
doctor, the Court deems it just and proper to exempt him from A.M. No.
09-7-03-0. It 11,ust be stressed, however, that this exemption shall not serve
as a legal precedent.

Section 56 of Civil Service Commission Memorandum Circular No.

41, Series of 1998, states that all absences of an official or employee in
excess of his or her accumulated vacation or sick leave credits earned shall
be without pay, and that vacation leave credits may be used whenever sick
leave credits have been exhausted, but not vice versa. Thus, the Court can
only withhold the salaries and benefits corresponding to the period in
excess of Mr. Mayor's earned vacation leave credits and special leave with
pay.

The Cou11 takes this opportunity to remind the OCA of its duty to
comply with its own guidelines to avoid similar unfortunate incidents in the
future. The OCA is fu11her reminded of the Court's earlier directive for it to
study and establish rules and procedure for the electronic filing of
13
applications for leave in the judiciary. In addition, the OCA is directed to
include therein applications for authority to travel abroad.

IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, WE ISSUE A STERN

WARNING to Mike K. Mayor, Records Officer I of the Office of the
Clerk of Cout1, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Cebu City, that fu11her
failure to observe reasonable rules and guidelines for applying for a leave
of absence and travel authority shall be dealt with more severely.
1
'Re: Unauthorized Travel Abroad of .Judge Cleto R. Villacorta III. Regional Trial Court. Bra11ch 6,
Baguio City. A.M. No. 11-9-167-RTC. I I November 2013.

- over -
235
RESOLUTION 5 A.M. No. 12-5-39-MTC C
July 23, 2014

THE OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR IS ALSO

DIRECTED to expedite the processing of applications for travel authority
and to inform the applicant of its action thereon within a period not
exceeding more than one ( 1) week from receipt thereof. It is further
DIRECTED to report within ten (10) days whether it has already complied
with the directive to study and establish rules and procedure for the
electronic filing of applications for leave and travel authority in the
Judiciary.

SO ORDERED.

Very truly yours,

ivision Clerk of Court"" -?/1>-:>

2&
Mr. Mike K. Mayor The Hon. Executive Judge
Records Officer I Municipal Trial Court in Cities
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, OCC 6000 Cebu City
6000 Cebu City
The Clerk of Court
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, OCC
6000 Cebu City

Hon. Jose Midas P. Marquez (x) Office of Administrative Services (x)

Court Administrator Legal Office (x)
Hon. Raul B. Villanueva (x) Court Management Office (x)
Hon. Jenny Lind R. Aldecoa-Delorino (x) Financial Management Office (x)
Hon. Thelma C. Bahia (x) Docket & Clearance Division (x)
Deputy Court Administrators Leave Division (x)
OCA. Supreme Court OCA. Supreme Court

Public Information Office (x)

Library Services (x)
Supreme Court
(For uploading pursuant to A.M.
No. 12-7-1-SC)

SR