Judge Ignacio Macarine requested authorization from the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to travel to Hong Kong charged to his annual forced leave. However, he did not submit all required documents so his request remained pending. Macarine proceeded with the travel without receiving authorization. The OCA found Macarine guilty of violating OCA Circular No. 49-2003, which requires judges to secure authorization before foreign travel, in order to avoid disruption to court administration. While the right to travel is constitutionally guaranteed, it is not absolute and can be regulated, such as through the Circular's guidelines. Thus, by traveling abroad without official permission, Macarine violated the Circular.
Original Description:
Philippine Political Law Case Digests 2012 - 2013
Digested Cases of Supreme Court Decisions involving Political Law
Judge Ignacio Macarine requested authorization from the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to travel to Hong Kong charged to his annual forced leave. However, he did not submit all required documents so his request remained pending. Macarine proceeded with the travel without receiving authorization. The OCA found Macarine guilty of violating OCA Circular No. 49-2003, which requires judges to secure authorization before foreign travel, in order to avoid disruption to court administration. While the right to travel is constitutionally guaranteed, it is not absolute and can be regulated, such as through the Circular's guidelines. Thus, by traveling abroad without official permission, Macarine violated the Circular.
Judge Ignacio Macarine requested authorization from the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) to travel to Hong Kong charged to his annual forced leave. However, he did not submit all required documents so his request remained pending. Macarine proceeded with the travel without receiving authorization. The OCA found Macarine guilty of violating OCA Circular No. 49-2003, which requires judges to secure authorization before foreign travel, in order to avoid disruption to court administration. While the right to travel is constitutionally guaranteed, it is not absolute and can be regulated, such as through the Circular's guidelines. Thus, by traveling abroad without official permission, Macarine violated the Circular.
COURT ADMINISTRATOR v. JUDGE IGNACIO B. MACARINE A.M. No. MTJ-10-1770, 18 July 2012, SECOND DIVISION (Brion, J.)
The constitutional right to travel is not absolute since the OCA may regulate the travels of Judges and personnel to avoid disruption in the administration of justice. Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) issued the Circular No. 492003 requiring all foreign travels of judges and court personnel to be with prior permission from the Court. Moreover, a travel authority must first be secured from the OCA. Accordingly, Judges must submit the complete requirements to the OCA at least two weeks before the intended time of travel. Judge Ignacio Macarine requested for authority to travel to Hongkong with his family. Said travel was to be charged to Judge Macarines annual forced leave. However, Judge Macarine did not submit the complete requirements so his request for authority to travel remained unacted upon. Judge Macarine proceeded with his travel abroad without the required travel authority. Judge Macarine was informed by the OCA that his leave of absence had been disapproved and his travel considered unauthorized by the Court. Accordingly, the absences of Judge Macarine shall not be deducted from his leave credits but from his salary. The OCA found Judge Macarine guilty of violation of OCA Circular No. 49-2003 for traveling out of the country without filing the necessary application for leave and without first securing a travel authority from the Court. ISSUE: Whether or not Judge Macarine is guilty of violation of OCA Circular No. 49-2003
HELD: The right to travel is guaranteed by the Constitution. However, the exercise of such right is not absolute. Section 6, Article III of the 1987 Constitution allows restrictions on ones right to travel provided that such restriction is in the interest of national security, public safety or public health as may be provided by law. This, however, should by no means be construed as limiting the Courts inherent power of administrative supervision over lower courts. OCA Circular No. 49-2003 does not restrict but merely regulates, by providing guidelines to be complied by judges and court personnel, before they can
u s t l a w l a w r e v i e w, v o l l v i i , n o . 1 , n o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2
p ol i t ic a l l aw
131
go on leave to travel abroad. To restrict is to restrain or prohibit a person from
doing something; to regulate is to govern or direct according to rule. To ensure management of court dockets and to avoid disruption in the administration of justice, OCA Circular No. 49-2003 requires a judge who wishes to travel abroad to submit, together with his application for leave of absence duly recommended for approval by his Executive Judge, a certification from the Statistics Division, Court Management Office of the OCA. The said certification shall state the condition of his docket based on his Certificate of Service for the month immediately preceding the date of his intended travel, that he has decided and resolved all cases or incidents within three (3) months from date of submission, pursuant to Section 15(1) and (2), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution. Thus, for traveling abroad without having been officially allowed by the Court, Justice Macarine is guilty of violation of OCA Circular No. 49-2003.
MARYNETTE R. GAMBOA v. P/SSPT. MARLOU C. CHAN
and P/SUPT. WILLIAM O. FANG G.R. No. 193636, 24 July 2012, EN BANC (Sereno, J.) The state interest of dismantling PAGs far outweighs the alleged intrusion on the private life of Gamboa, especially when the collection and forwarding by the PNP of information against her was pursuant to a lawful mandate.
Former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo issued Administrative Order No. 275 (A.O. 275) creating the Zearosa Commission (Commission) which was formed to investigate the existence of private army groups (PAGs) in the country in view of eliminating and dismantling them permanently in the future. Upon conclusion of its investigation, the Commission submitted a confidential report to the Office of the President.
Marynette Gamboa (Gamboa) was the Mayor of Dingras, Ilocos Norte. Gamboa alleged that the Philippine National Police Ilocos Norte (PNP) conducted surveillance operation against her and her aides, and classified her as a PAG coddler. Purportedly without the benefit of data verification, PNP forwarded the information gathered on her to the Commission, causing her inclusion in the Reports enumeration of individuals maintaining PAGs.
u s t l a w l a w r e v i e w, v o l l v i i , n o . 1 , n o v e m b e r 2 0 1 2