Title
AAA vs. Salazar
Case
A.M. No. HOJ-08-02
Decision Date
Oct 2, 2018
A 14-year-old minor accused a Hall of Justice foreman of rape in his office. Despite alibi and dismissed criminal charges, the Supreme Court found him guilty of gross misconduct, leading to dismissal, forfeiture of benefits, and perpetual disqualification from public office.
Font Size:

Case Digest (A.M. No. HOJ-08-02)

Facts:

Background of the Case

  • The case originated from a complaint filed by AAA, a 14-year-old minor, assisted by her mother, BBB, against respondent Edgardo V. Salazar, a Construction and Maintenance General Foreman at the Hall of Justice. AAA accused Salazar of raping her inside his office at the Hall of Justice on September 1, 2007.

Incident Details

  • AAA alleged that on August 28, 2007, she received a text message from someone registered as "Engineer" in her cousin CCC's phone, expressing romantic interest in her. She rejected the advances.
  • On September 1, 2007, AAA was accompanied by her cousins CCC and DDD to the Hall of Justice under the pretense of meeting someone who would give them a cellphone. Upon arrival, Salazar gave money to CCC and DDD to buy snacks, leaving AAA alone with him.
  • Salazar allegedly brought AAA to his office, where he sexually assaulted her by licking her vagina, inserting his finger, and penetrating her with his penis against her will.

Respondent's Defense

  • Salazar denied the allegations, claiming the complaint was fabricated by AAA, whom he described as a "wayward teenager" who had eloped with her boyfriend.
  • He presented an alibi, stating that on September 1, 2007, he was overseeing an anti-termite chemical application at the Hall of Justice and left by 10:00 a.m. to travel with his family to Antipolo.
  • Salazar also noted that the Provincial Prosecutor dismissed AAA's criminal complaint for insufficiency of evidence, although the case was under review by the Department of Justice.

Investigation and Findings

  • The Office of the Court Administrator initially found the charge serious enough to warrant a full-blown investigation.
  • Judge Emma P. Bauzon, who conducted the investigation, found inconsistencies in AAA's testimony and noted that the medical examination did not conclusively prove rape. She recommended dismissing the administrative complaint.
  • The Office of the Court Administrator, however, recommended further investigation due to the absence of testimony from AAA's cousins, CCC and DDD, who failed to appear despite subpoenas.
  • The Court Administrator ultimately found AAA's testimony credible and recommended Salazar's dismissal for gross misconduct.

Issue:

  • Whether respondent Edgardo V. Salazar is guilty of gross misconduct and/or conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service, warranting the penalty of dismissal from service, forfeiture of all retirement benefits, and perpetual disqualification from holding any public office.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)


Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.