EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUL 9 2002.

AM No. 02-3-02-SB (Re: Request of Justice Nicodemo T. Ferrer to Retire Under R.A. No. 910, as Amended.)

This is a motion filed by Associate Justice Nicodemo T. Ferrer of the Sandiganbayan seeking “clarification” this Court of resolution, dated May 7, 2002, which denied “for lack of merit [his] petition . . . . to tack his available leave credits to his government service to avail of lifetime pension after five (5) years from the effectivity of his compulsory retirement on August 3, 2002 and an additional 5% longevity pay to his present 15% longevity pay so that he will have a total of 20% longevity pay for purposes of retirement.”

As of March 4, 2002, Justice Ferrer has in his favor leave credits equal to 462 days which if allowed to be tacked to his government service is sufficient to enable him to satisfy the 20-year minimum government service required under R.A. No. 910, §1 and entitle him to receive retirement gratuity equivalent to five years lump sum including longevity pay and monthly pension after the fifth year.

In his motion for clarification, Justice Ferrer claims that the resolution of May 7, 2002 failed to resolve his prayer to be allowed to retire under R.A. No. 910, as amended, because the resolution only denied his request to be given 5% longevity pay in addition to the 15% longevity pay he at present receives. In a supplemental petition, he cites this Court’s resolutions in A.M. No. 5460-Ret and A.M. No. 5498-Ret allowing Justices Efren Plana arid Venicio Escolin, respectively, to use their credits in order to make up for the deficiency in their age and service under R.A. No. 910, §1.

By denying his petition to be allowed to tack his available leave credits to his government service, the Court in effect denied Justice Ferrer’s prayer to be allowed to avail of the retirement benefits under R.A. No.910, §1, as amended, which requires that the retiree must have rendered at least 20 years of service to the government in order to be entitled to a lifetime pension after five (5) years from the effectivity of his compulsory retirement on August 3, 2002 and 5% longevity pay in addition to his present 15% longevity pay so that he will have a total of 20% longevity pay for purposes of retirement.

The issue in this case is whether leave credits may be tacked to the service record to enable a member of the judiciary to meet the age and service requirements of R.A. No. 910 as well as the longevity pay requirements in B.P. Blg. 129, §42 which is 5% of the basic pay for every five (5) years of continuous service in the judiciary, as basis for computation of retirement pay.

In A.M. No. 00-12-14-CA, Min. Res., Jan. 23, 2001, the Court denied the request of Associate Justice Celso L. Magsino of the Court of Appeals, for the tacking of his leave credits for an additional 5% longevity pay. But in A.M. No. 01-8-485-RTC, Min. Res., Sept. 10, 2001, the Court granted the request of Judge Guillermo L. Loja, Sr. of the Regional Trial Court, Manila, Branch 26, to tack his 701.666 days of leave credits to his 18 years, 5 months, and 4 days service in the judiciary to enable him to receive 20% longevity pay.

In A.M. No. 0-4-06-0, Min. Res., July 11, 2000, the Court granted the request of Judge Leonardo P. Ansaldo for the addition of his 287.916 days leave credits to enable him to complete the five years continuous service in the judiciary and entitle him to receive five percent (5%) longevity pay under B.P. 129, §42.

In A.M. No. 98-3-118-RTC, Min Res., June 9, 1998, the Court granted the request of retired Judge Antonio V. Mendez, Sr., Regional Trial Court, Branch 62, Gumaca, Quezon to tack his leave credits to his 19 years, 10 months, and 5 days government service (the last 9 years, 10 months, and 24 days of which were continuously rendered in the judiciary) to allow him to receive, under R.A. No. 910, lifetime pension five (5) years from after his retirement.

In A.M. No. 9279-Ret., Min. Res., Sept. 2, 1997, the Court granted the request of Judge Jose L. Orlino, RTC, General Santos City for the payment of 10% longevity pay by tacking/adding his 546.668 days leave credits to complete the required 10 years continuous service in the judiciary.

In A.M. No. 8796-Ret, Min. Res., Dec. 12, 1995, the court denied Judge Efren N. Ambrosio’s request that his accumulated leave credits be applied to cover the 3 months and 12 days deficiency in the required 5 years service in the judiciary after his reappointment thereto in 1990 so that he could qualify for optional retirement under RA. No. 910.

In A.M. No. 95-6-03-SC, Min. Res., June 27, 1995, the Court granted the request of Deputy Court Administrator Juanito A. Bernad to tack his 767 days leave credits to complete his 30 years continuous service to entitle him to 30% longevity pay for purposes of computing his retirement benefits.

In a minute resolution, dated July 25, 1991, the Court adjusted the longevity pay of Supreme Court Justice Emilio A. Gancayco by, allowing him to tack his 1,079 accumulated leave credits to his 25 years of service so that he could receive 30% longevity pay.

In A.M. No. 7059-Ret., Min. Res., Jan. 9, 1991, the Court granted Court Administrator Meynardo A. Tiro an additional 5% longevity pay so that he could have a total of 15% longevity pay for purposes of retirement by tacking his vacation and sick leave credits of 570 days to his four (4) years of continuous service as Deputy Court Administrator and then as Court Administrator.

Thus, in the majority of cases, the tacking of leave credits to government service was allowed either to enable retiring members of the judiciary to complete the age/service requirements of R.A. No. 910 or to increase their longevity pay for purposes of computing their retirement benefits. Indeed, a policy allowing a retiring member of the judiciary to choose between the money value of his leave credits and the right to tack it to his service in the government to enable him to satisfy the service requirement of R.A. No. 910 in accordance with the well-settled rule that retirements laws are to be liberally construed in favor of the retiree.[1] Hence, Justice Ferrer’s request should be granted.

WHEREFORE, the Court RESOLVED to reconsider the resolution of May 7, 2002 and GRANT Associate Justice Nicodemo T. Ferrer’s request to be allowed to tack his available leave credits in order to enable him to satisfy the requirement of 20 years government service under R.A. No. 910 and thus receive, in addition to give (5) years lump sum, a monthly annuity after five years from the effectivity of his compulsory retirement on August 3, 2002 and 5% longevity pay in addition to his present 15% longevity pay or a total of 20% longevity pay, for purposes of his retirement.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court

[1] Request of Clerk of Court Tessie L. Gatmaitan, CA, for Payment of Retirement Benefits of CA Justice Jorge S. imperial, 313 SCRA 134, 140 (1999); Profeta v. Drilon, 216 SCRA 777, 783 (1992); Bengzon v. Drilon, 208 SCRA 133, 156 (1992); In re: Monthly Pension of Judges and Justices, 190 SCRA 315, 320 (1990).