‘RCAO 7 BENEFICIAL TO LOCAL COURTS’
The creation of the regional office is one of the issues raised in the impeachment complaint filed against Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.
The defunct Regional Court Administration Office (RCAO) in Lapu-Lapu City would have addressed the basic needs of local court employees and personnel.
That would have included easy access to court workers’ personal records and quicker release of funds for purchase of basic court office supplies, among others.
The creation of the office, which was patterned after the Manila-based Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), was recently questioned by Senior Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo de Castro. De Castro said that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno created the office without the knowledge or approval of the court en banc.
The matter is one of the issues raised in the impeachment complaint against Sereno.
But if most local court employees and personnel favored the creation of RCAO 7, why did the Supreme Court (SC) abolish the office?
Former executive judge Meinrado Paredes of the Regional Trial Court in Cebu City theorized that OCA in Manila did not want to be “bypassed” by RCAO 7.
“The creation of RCAO 7 was actually beneficial to court employees and personnel,” Paredes told Sun.Star Cebu.
The office, he said, was meant to decentralize court administrative functions, such as the purchase of office supplies and other needs of local courts.
But instead of empowering RCAO 7 to serve the local courts, Paredes said that the OCA in Manila frowned on the idea.
Despite RCAO 7’s brief operations, Paredes recalled that local courts had the option to more quickly perform their functions such as by hiring utility personnel or buying better-quality office supplies for the same price.
Retired judge Simeon Dumdum Jr. shared Paredes’ view, saying that the office should have been revived and received the SC’s full support.
“It’s a long overdue idea,” said Dumdum.
Some court employees, who asked not to be named, said the office made it easier for them to transact even on personal matters. RCAO 7, which is located at the Lapu-Lapu City Hall of Justice, was launched in 2008 by the late chief justice Reynato Puno. A ceremonial reopening was held on Oct. 29, 2012.
Autonomy
The office was meant “to enhance the autonomy, accountability and efficiency of the judiciary and the administration of justice” in Central Visayas.
Judge Crescencio Tan was the first RCAO 7 director. He served for two years before he decided to return to being the presiding judge of the Regional Trial Court Branch 30 in Dumaguete City.
He was replaced by Francisco Pando, and then by Rose Pabatao.
Chief Justice Sereno later issued Administrative Order (AO) 175-2012 creating the Judiciary Decentralized Office ( JDO), which reopened the RCAO 7.
Sereno appointed former Cebu judge and now Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Geraldine Faith Econg as head of the JDO.
About 30 employees were assigned during the office’s opening, but later reduced to only three after it was reported that some SC magistrates frowned on Sereno’s move to reopen it.
De Castro, in a House hearing, said that the SC en banc did not approve Sereno’s resolution, which ordered the reopening of RCAO 7.
In a memorandum dated Dec. 3, 2012, de Castro also rejected Sereno’s resolution, saying it does not reflect the “vehement objections” of the associate justices to Sereno’s administrative order. That AO designated the head for JDO in Region 7 based in Cebu City. The JDO was tasked to “take full responsibility over the RCAO in Region 7.”
De Castro also questioned Sereno’s appointment of Econg as acting chief of RCAO.
In the same memorandum, de Castro pointed out that “the chief justice does not have authority to create the JDO.”
During the impeachment proceedings, De Castro sought to clear the confusion on the JDO and RCAO offices. She also questioned the appointment of Econg as head of RCAO 7, saying that latter is “answerable only to the Chief Justice without any guidelines set by the court en banc.” /