The Antecedents To recap, a complaint was filed against Judge Abul, then Presiding Judge of Branch 4, Regional Trial Court of Butuan City, Agusan Del Norte, alleging that he extorted large amounts of money ranging from P200,000.00 to P300,000.00 from the detainees of the Provincial Jail of Agusan in exchange for their release from prison or the dismissal of their criminal cases. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) conducted an investigation after it received a letter from Rev. Father Antoni A. Saniel exposing Judge Abul's alleged illegal activities. During its investigation, the OCA confirmed thai Judge Abul indeed engaged in extortion activities, a grave misconduct constituting a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, and recommended that Judge Abul be fined the amount of P500,000.00 to be deducted from his retirement gratuity.2 However, while the administrative case was pending review by this Court, Judge Abul met an untimely death3 when he was targeted by an unidentified motorcycle-riding shooter while he was about to depart from his house. Fortunately, his spouse survived the ambush, although she also sustained gunshot wounds.4 In a Per Curiam Decision5 dated September 3, 2019, the Court, by a Majority vote,6 found sufficient grounds to hold Judge Abul administratively liable for Misconduct. Significantly, the Majority found that notwithstanding Judge Abul's death before the resolution of his administrative case, the complaint against him should not be dismissed considering that he was fully afforded due process during the investigation stage and that the Court's jurisdiction over the case survives his death. The Court emphasized that grave misconduct is a serious offense punishable with dismissal from the service, forfeiture of all or part of the benefits, and perpetual disqualification from reappointment or appointment to any public office, including government-owned and controlled corporations, except accrued leave credits. Yet, in view of Judge Abul's passing, the Majority deemed it proper to impose the accessory penalty of forfeiture of all retirement and allied benefits, except accrued leaves, upon him.7 The Court is now poised to resolve the Motion for Reconsideration8 filed by the aggrieved surviving spouse of Judge Abul, Bernadita C. Abul (Bernadita),9 on the aspect of survivorship benefits and given the fact that Judge Abul "is no longer in the position to assail the findings of the majority, finding him GUILTY of Gross Misconduct, and imposing on him the penalty of FORFEITURE of all his benefits including retirement gratuity, to plead his innocence or to express his remorse[.]"10 After much deliberation and careful consideration, the Court resolve to grant the Motion for Reconsideration. To be sure, this resolution is berthed on strong grounds and constitutional precepts, particularly on the individual's rights to presumption of innocence and due process. The end FOLLOW US! 🛒 https://shopple.co/Lex-curiae ▶️ https://youtube.com/@attyphiljuris 🌐 https://bit.ly/m/AttyEblogger