CHRISTIAN DE LEON GABALFIN

LS2019-00069

MS. FLORITA PALMA and MS. FILIPINA MERCADO, Complainants,

vs.
JUDGE GEORGE E. OMELIO, Regional Trial Court, Br. 14, Davao City (then of
Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Br. 4, Davao City), JUDGE VIRGILIO G.
MURCIA, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Br. 2, and Clerk of Court MA.
FLORIDA C. OMELIO, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Office of the Clerk of
Court, both of the Island Garden City of Samal., Respondents.
A.M. No. RTJ-10-2223 (August 30, 2017)

Facts: On March 17, 2008, a certain Fiorita Palma (Palma) sent an e-mail to the
pio@supremecourt.gov.ph complaining about the alleged dishonorable conduct of
respondents Judge Ornelio and his wife, Clerk of Court Ma. Florida C. Omelio
(CoC Omelio), relative to the solemnization of the marriage of a certain
"Echeverria." Acting thereon, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA)
dispatched an investigating team to Davao City which found as follows: First, the
marriage certificate of the spouse (Julius Echeverria and Khristine Duo) was
signed by Judge Murcia, though, they were formally solemnized by Judge Omelio.
Second, that according to Judge Omelio, he merely “re-enacted” the marriage at
the residence of the spouse, which was purportedly solemnized by Judge Murcia in
his court sala, for “picture-taking purposes”. Third, Judge Murcia did not really
perform the solemnization in his sala, and; Lastly, Mrs. Omelio, the Clerk of Court
(CoC) of Judge Murcia, failed to collect the necessary solemnization fee.
In a Memorandum dated January 15, 2014, the OCA found all three respondents to
have violated Administrative Order No. 125-2007 (AO 125-2007), to wit: Judge
Omelio for solemnizing the marriage without signing the Marriage Certificate;
Judge Murcia for affixing his signature in the Marriage Certificate without actually
performing the marriage; and CoC Omelio for failing to collect the solemnization
fee.

Issue: Whether the conviction of the respondents by OCA is valid.

Ruling: Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the OCA. The contention
of Judge Omelio that he merely re-enacted the wedding ceremony of Julius and
Khristine was debunked by Julius` admission that it was really Judge Omelio who
solemnized them. Julius also denied knowing or appearing before Judge Murcia.

What I learned: Marriage procedures must be strictly observed and its sanctity
shall be preserved. Though it was just an alibi of the defense, SC said that a duly
authorized solemnizing officer cannot perform marriage re-enactment. They should
know that marriage should not be trifled with, and its sanctity and inviolability
should never be undermined, especially by such a lame ground as picture-taking.