3aepublic of tbe ~bilipptne~

~upreme <tourt
:fflanila
EN BANC

OFFICE OF THE COURT A.M. No. P-19-4002

ADMINISTRATOR, [Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]
Complainant,
Present:

GESMUNDO, C.J,
LEONEN, *
CAGUIOA,
HERNANDO **
--versus-
'
LAZARO-JAVIER,
INTING,
ZALAMEDA,
LOPEZ, M.,
GAERLAN,
ROSARIO,
LOPEZ, J.,
DIMAAMPAO,
MARQUEZ,***
UTILITY WORKER I GERSON KHO, JR., and
0. GALAN, REGIONAL TRIAL SINGH, JJ ****
COURT, BRANCH 30, ILOILO
CITY, ILOILO, Promulgated:
Respondent. May 14, 2024

X -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- ~ ~ - - -- X
DECISION -- • ~ /
PERCURIAM:

This administrative case stemmed from a Letter 1 dated March 8, 2019,

written by Executive Judge Victor E. Gelvezon (Executive Judge Gelvezon)
informing the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) of the March 7, 2019

* On official business.
** On leave.
*** No pa1t due to prior participation as Court Administrator.
**** On leave.
1
Rollo, p. I .
Decision 2 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

arrest of respondent Gerson 0. Galan (Galan), Utility Worker I, Branch 30,

Regional Trial Court (RTC), Iloilo City, for selling dangerous drugs.

The Antecedents

In an Information2 dated March 9, 2019 filed before Branch 38, RTC

of Iloilo City, Galan and co-accused Praud Joan L. Animas (Animas) were
charged with violating Section 5 of Republic Act No. 9165, otherwise known
as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. The accusatory portion
of the Information reads:

That on or about the 7 th day of March 2019, in the City of Iloilo,

Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, said
accused, with deliberate intent and without any justifiable motive,
conspiring, confederating, and helping each other, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully, knowingly, and criminally dispense, sell, trade,
distribute, deliver, and give away to poseur buyer 101 REMSON TIU
one (1) small heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet (marked as "BB-PA_
3/7 /19"), containing 0.1689 gram of white crystalline substance which
tested positive for the presence of Methamphetamine Hydrochloride, or
Shabu, a dangerous drug, per Chemistry Report No. PDEAROVI-
- DD019-094[,] without being authorized by law or the Dangerous Drugs
Board to dispense, sell, trade, distribute, deliver, or give away the same, in
consideration of THREE THOUSAND Pesos ([PHP 3,000.00]), using a
previously subscribed one thousand peso bill, bearing Serial No.
AJ85128l, and two (2) pieces one thousand peso boodle bills, as buy-bust
money, which were likewise recovered from the person, possession, and
control of accused PRAUD JOAN ANIMAS y LOPEZ alias "Lab-lab"
upon the arrest of both accused.

CONTRARY TO LAW. 3 (Emphasis in the original)

Galan was arrested in a buy-bust operation conducted by the Iloilo City

Drug Enforcement Unit (CDEU) on March 7, 2019. According to the
prosecution, a confidential agent informed the CDEU that Animas and Galan
were engaged in selling illegal drugs. On the day of the buy-bust operation,
Galan met with the confidential agent and poseur buyer 101 Remson Tiu (101
Tiu), and then led and introduced 101 Tiu to Animas as a customer. Animas
gave IO 1 Tiu one ( 1) plastic sachet which later tested positive for the presence
ofMethamphetamine Hydrochloride or shabu. 4

The criminal case against Galan was docketed as Criminal Case No.
19-'-83525, and raffled to Branch 35, RTC oflloilo City. 5 Galan was an-aigned

2
Id. at 7.
Id.
4
Id. at 8-9.
Id. at 57.
Decision 3 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

on April 23, 2019. 6 Subsequently, in a Motion to Plea Bargain filed on May

9, 2019, Galan asked the RTC to allow him to withdraw his previous plea of
"not guilty" to the offense punishable under Section 5 of Republic Act No.
9165, and to enter instead a plea of "guilty" to the lesser offense punishable
under Section 12. 7 The Motion to Plea Bargain was granted by the RTC in an
Order8 dated May 2 7, 2019. 9 Thereafter, on August 9, 2019, the RTC rendered
a Decision 10 finding respondent guilty beyond reasonable doubt of violating
Section 12 of Republic Act No. 9165, as follows:

WHEREFORE, the Court finds accused PRAUD JOAN

ANIMAS y LOPEZ alias "Lablab" and GERSON GALAN y ORIGEN
in Criminal Case No. 19-83525 and accused PRAUD JOAN ANIMAS y
LOPEZ alias "Lablab" in Criminal Case No. 19-83526, guilty beyond
reasonable doubt for Violation of Section 12, Article II of Republic Act
9165, respectively.

Accused PRAUD JOAN ANIMAS y LOPEZ alias "Lablab" and

GERSON GALAN y ORI GEN are hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty
• of imprisonment ranging from SIX (6) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY as
minimum to FOUR (4) Y]H:ARS as maximum and to pay a fine of Thirty
Thousand Pesos ([PHP 30,000.00]) each in Criminal Case No. 19-83525,
with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency in accordance with
Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code.

In Criminal Case No. 19-83526, accused PRAUD JOAN

ANIMAS y LOPEZ is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of
imprisonment ranging from SIX (6) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY as
minimum to FOUR (4) YEARS as maximum and to pay a fine of Thirty
Thousand Pesos ([PHP 30,000.00]), with subsidiary imprisonment in case
of insolvency i1~ accordance with Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code.

Both accused are ordered to undergo a drug dependency test. If they

are found positive after the aforementioned test, they shall undergo
treatment and rehabilitation for a period of not less than six (6) months. The·
period for their treatment and rehabilitation as well as the period for their
after care and follow up program shall be credited to their penalty.

If both accused are found negative after the drug dependency test,
they will be released in time otherwise they will serve their sentence in jail
minus their counseling period at the rehabilitation center.

The buy bust money in the amount of Three Thousand Pesos ([PHP
3,000.00]) is ordered returned to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency
Regional Office VI, Camp Martin Delgado, Fort San Pedro Drive, Iloilo
City. The methamphetamine hydrochloride consisting of 0.1689 gram in
Criminal Case No. 19-83525 and 3.1459 grams in Criminal Case No. 19-

6 Id. at 68.
7
Id. at 69-70.
8
Id. at 71-73.
9
Id. at 73.
10
Id. at 76~78. The August 29, 2019 Decision in Criminal Case No. 19-83526 was penned by Presiding
Judge Daniel Antonio Gerardo S. Amular of Branch 35, Regional Trial Court, Iloilo City.
Decision 4 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

83526 are hereby ordered confiscated and to be destroyed in accordance

with the law.

SO ORDERED. 11 (Emphasis in the original)

On January 13, 2020, Galan tendered his resignation as Utility Worker

I of Branch 30:, RTC, Iloilo City. 12

JIB Report and Recommendation

In its l\llarch 30, 2022 Report and Recommendation, 13 the Judicial

Integrity Board (JIB) recommended that Galan be found guilty of gross
misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service. 14 The
pertinent portion of the said recommendation provides:

ACCORDINGLY, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED that

respondent Gerson 0. Galan, Utility Worker I, Regional Trial Court, Branch
30, Iloilo City, be found GUILTY of gross misconduct and conduct
prejudicial to the best interest of the service and be penalized with a fine of
[PHP 150,000.00], with forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Court
may determine. Provided, however, that such forfeiture of benefits shall in
no case include accrued leave credits. 15

The JIB found Galan's criminal act to fall squarely within the
jurisprudential definition of grave misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the
best interest of the service. According to the JIB, Galan committed a flagrant
violation of the law which besmirched the image of the court where he
worked. 16 Thus, the JIB recommended that Galan be penalized with a fine of
PHP _150,000.00, with forfeiture of all or part of the benefits as the Court may
determine, except accrued leave credits. 17

The Court's Ruling

The Court agrees with the findings and recommendations of the JIB.
Galan' s participation in illegal drug activities, wherein he was charged and
convicted pursuant to a buy-bust operation, constitutes grave misconduct and
conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

11
Id. at 77-78.
12
Id. at 63.
13
Id. at 106-112, submitted by Justice Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez (Ret.)
14
Id. at 112.
1s Id.
16
Id. at 110.
17
Id. at 112.
Decision 5 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

Jurisprudence defines misconduct as "a transgression of some

established and definite rule of action, more particularly, unlawful behavior
or gross negligence by a public officer." 18 In Grave Misconduct, as
distinguished from Simple :tvlisconduct, the elements of corruption, clear
intent to violate the law or flagrant disregard of established rules, mµst be
manifest and established by substantial evidence. 19

. On the other hand, acts may constitute conduct prejudicial to the best
interest of the service when they tarnish the image and integrity of the
respondent's public office. 20 It refers to acts or omissions that violate the norm
of public accountability and diminish - or tend to diminish - the people's
faith in the Judiciary. 21

In this case, Galan was caught red-handed participating in illegal drug

activities during a buy-bust operation, and found guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of committing the offense punishable under Section 12 of Republic Act
No. 9165, viz.:

Section 12. Possession of Equipment, Instrument, Apparatus and

Other Paraphernalia for Dangerous Drugs. -The penalty of imprisonment
ranging from six (6) months and one (1) day to four (4) years and a fine·
ranging from Ten thousand pesos (Pl0,000.00) to Fifty thousand pesos
(PS0,000.00) shall be imposed µpon any person, who, unless authorized by
law, shall possess or have under his/her control any equipment, instrument,
apparatus and other paraphernalia fit or intended for smoking, consuming,
administering, injecting, ingesting, or introducing any dangerous drug into
the body ...

It goes without saying that Galan demonstrated unlawful behavior and

a manifest intent to violate the law in performing the criminal act that he was
convicted of. Further, the fact that he was an employee of a court necessarily
tasked with the adjudication of drug-related cases, while himself being
involved in criminal drug operations, adversely and gravely affected the
image and integrity of the court to the general public, in which he was lmown
to be an employee. Undoubtedly, Galan committed grave misconduct and
conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

The Court reminds Galan that the image of a court of justice is

necessarily mirrored in the conduct, official or otherwise, of the men and
women who work thereat, froni the judge to the least and lowest of its
personnel. Thus, it becomes the imperative sacred duty of each and every one
in the court to maintain its good name and standing as a true temple of justice.

18
Domingo v. Civil Service Commission, 874 Phil. 587, 603 (2020) [Per J. Lazaro-Javier, First Division].
19 Id
20
See Office ofthe Ombudsman-Visayas v. Castro, 759 Phil. 68, 79(2015) [Per J. Brion, Second Division].
21
Judge Zarate-Fernandez v. Lovendino, 827 Phil. 191, 199 [2018) [Per Curiam, En Banc].
Decision 6 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

As front liners in the administration of justice, court personnel should live up

to the strictest standards of honesty and integrity in the public service, and in
this light, are always expected to act in a manner free from reproach. Any
conduct, act, or omission that may diminish the people's faith in the Judiciary
should not be tolerated. 22

Having established Galan's administrative liability, the Court now

determines the proper penalty to be imposed on him. Under Section 14 of Rule
140 of the Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. No. 21-08-09-SC dated
February 22, 2022, "gross misconduct" and "prejudicial conduct that gravely
besmirches or taints the reputation of the service" are considered serious
charges. 23 While these constitute as two charges, they arise from a single act,
particularly, Galan being caught in an anti-drug operation. Section 20 of the
same Rules mandates that Galan shall be meted the appropriate penalty for
the more serilous offense. 24 Notably, however, grave misconduct and
prejudicial conduct that gravely besmirches or taints the reputation of the
service are both classified as serious charges, hence, a single set of penalties
for both offenses would be sufficient.

. Moreover, a respondent who is found liable for the commission of a

serious charge but has already been separated from the service due to
resignation, retirement, or other modes except for death, may be meted with
the following penalties in lieu of dismissal:

a. F orfoiture of all or part of the benefits as the Supreme Comi may

determine, and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment
to any public office, including goverrunent-owned or -controlled
corporations. Provided, however, that the forfeiture of benefits shall
in no case include accrued leave benefits; and/or
b. A fine of more than PHP 100,000.00 but not exceeding PHP
200,000.00. 25

With this, the Court deems it proper to impose upon Galan the penalty
of a fine in the amount of PHP 150,000.00, forfeiture of his retirement and
other benefits except accrued leave credits, and perpetual disqualification
from reinstatement or appointment to any public office.

ACCORDINGLY, the Court finds respondent Gerson 0. Galan

GUILTY of gross misconduct and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of
the service. He is hereby ordered to PAY a FINE of PHP 150,000.00, with
FORFEITUR:E of his retirement and other benefits, except accrued leave

22 Id. at 202.
23
Rules of Court, Rule 140, Section 14(a) & (1), as amended by A.M. No. 21-08-09-SC, February 22, 2022.
24
Rules of Court, Rule 140, Section 21, as amended by A.M. No. 21-08-09-SC, February 22, 2022.
25
Rules of Court, Rule 140, Sections 17-18, as amended by A.M. No. 21-08-09-SC, February 22, 2022.
Decision 7 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Formerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

credits. Likewise, he is PERPETUALLY DISQUALIFIED from re-

employment in any government agency or instrumentality, including any
government-owned and controlled corporation or government financial
institution.

This Decision shall take effect immediately upon respondent Gerson 0.

Galan's receipt of a copy of the same. Respondent Gerson 0. Galan shall
inform this Court in writing of the date he received a copy of this Decision.

Let copies of this Decision be furnished to the Office of the Court

Administrator for attachment to the respondent Gerson 0. Galan's official
records.

SO ORDERED.

WE CONCUR:

/
/ /
• '
.

ALJXAN . GESMU
1:. . Justice

(On official business)

MARVIC M.V.F. LEONEN ALF
Senior Associate Justice

• '
(On leave) /.
RAMON PAULL. HERNANDO AMYl: LAZ RO-JAVIER
Associate Justice .M sociate Justice

c S:M3~
Associate Justice
 Decision 8 A.M. No. P-19-4002
[Fonnerly A.M. No. 19-08-194-RTC]

/J
OR.ROSARIO JHOSE~OPEZ
Associate Justice

(No part)
J JOSE MIDAS P. MARQUEZ
~ssociate Justice Associate Justice

,-,----,-,.-"-" ..--, .,- (On leave)

_/ __,r_,,-,--~NTONio t:no::m.---, MARIA FILOMENA D. SINGH
Associate Justice '· Associate Justice