Plaza Vs Amamio
Plaza Vs Amamio
Amamio
Facts:
1. The complainant alleges that sometime in the first week of
July 2007, he heard that some of the personnel of RTC
(Branch 26) were planning to hold a Sara Lee party in the
Argao Hall of Justice and that upon learning of the plan, he
informed the personnel of the said court about
Administrative Circular No. 3-92 prohibiting the use of the
Halls of Justice for residential or commercial purposes.
2. The complainant claims that in the morning of July 14, 2007,
a Saturday, the security guard on duty, Mr. Roger O.
Jimenez, telephoned him with the information that there
were persons from Sara Lee who wanted to enter the Argao
Hall of Justice to put up the decorations, sound system and
catering equipment for the Sara Lee party. The complainant
states that he directed Mr. Jimenez not to allow the persons
to enter the premises. He then called up Atty. Amamio to
inform her of the situation and of the infraction that would
be committed should the Sara Lee party push through. The
complainant alleges that Atty. Amamio insisted that she had
authorized the Sara Lee party and raffle draw.
3. The complainant then recounts the events that transpired as
recorded in the security logbook of the Argao Hall of Justice
x x x. In the logbook, Mr. Jimenez wrote that at around 11:05
in the morning of July 14, 2007, he received a telephone call
from Ms. Vasquez approving the use of the entrance lobby
for the raffle draw which she claimed was authorized by
Atty. Amamio. According to the entries in the logbook, the
raffle draw started at around 2:00 p.m. and ended at 5:00
p.m., with fifty-one (51) participants attending the event.
4. The complainant adds that even the security guards on duty
who recorded the Sara Lee event in the logbook were later
subjected to x x x harassment by the respondents who
questioned the guards [as to] why the said event was
recorded in the logbook. He claims that Atty. Amamio even
reprimanded the guards x x x, castigating the latter for also
jotting down in the logbook court personnel who were not in
uniform.
should
continue
despite
the
Ruling:
A. Yes. Indeed, the holding of a raffle draw at the Argao Hall of
Justice by the staff of Sara Lee degraded the honor and
dignity of the court and exposed the premises, as well as
the judicial records to danger of loss or damage. In
Administrative Circular No. 3-92, we have already reminded
all judges and court personnel that the Halls of Justice may