Death of a respondent in an administrative case

Death of a respondent in an administrative case " My father who was a judge recently joined our creator. Before his demise, he had a pending administrative case before the Supreme Court for allegedly violating the internal rules among magistrates and a couple of other violations. Accordingly, the penalty for his alleged infractions consists of forfeiture of his retirement benefits, among others. In this relation, as his surviving family members who are not knowledgeable of the laws, we want to know if his death prior to the resolution of the administrative case will result in its outright dismissal. Mandy Dear Mandy,The answer to your query is no, since the death of a respondent in an administrative case does not automatically divest a court of its jurisdiction over the case. To elucidate this point, allow me to lead your attention to a pertinent high court ruling discussing the rule with respect to the effect of death of a respondent in an administrative case. In Office of the Court Administrator vs Salubre (AM MTJ-05-1618, Oct. 22, 2013), a per curiam decision, the Supreme Court citing several cases said, viz:“Jurisprudence is settled that the death of a respondent does not preclude a finding of administrative liability subject to certain exceptions. In the case of Gonzales v[s] Escalona, this Court expounded on this doctrine: “While his death intervened after the completion of the investigation, it has been settled that the Court is not ousted of its jurisdiction over an administrative matter by the mere fact that the respondent public official ceases to hold office during the pendency of the respondent’s case jurisdiction once acquired, continues to exist until the final resolution of the case. In Layao Jr. v[s] Caube, we held that the death of the respondent in an administrative case does not preclude a finding of administrative liability:“‘This jurisdiction that was ours at the time of the filing of the administrative complainant was not lost by the mere fact that the respondent public official had ceased in office during the pendency of his case. The Court retains its jurisdiction either to pronounce the respondent public official innocent of the charges or declared him guilty thereof. A contrary rule would be fraught with injustice and pregnant with dreadful and dangerous implications…If innocent, respondent public official merits vindication of his name and integrity as he leaves the government which he has served well and faithfully if guilty, he deserves to receive the corresponding censure and a penalty proper and imposable under the situation.’ “The above rule is not without exceptions, as we explained in the case of Limliman vs Judge Ulat-Marrero, where we said death of the respondent necessitates the dismissal of the administrative case upon a consideration of any of the following factors: first, the observance of respondent’s right to due process second, the presence of exceptional circumstances in the case on the grounds of equitable and humanitarian reasons and third, it may also depend on the kind of penalty imposed.”(Emphasis supplied)Applying the above-cited jurisprudence in your question, it is clear that the death of your father while his administrative case was pending does not automatically suggest the dismissal of his case. Succinctly, only when the jurisprudential exceptions, i.e., an issue on the observance of respondent’s right to due process the presence of exceptional circumstances grounded on equitable and humanitarian reasons and the kind of penalty imposed, are present may the court consider dismissing the same.We hope that we were able to answer your queries. This advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to dearpao@manilatimes.net" - https://www.affordablecebu.com/