Case Digest (A.M. No. RTJ-18-2537)
Facts:
Abdulsamad P. Bogabong v. Hon. Rasad G. Balindong, A.M. No. RTJ-18-2537 [Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 13-4027-RTJ], August 14, 2019, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam.Complainant Abdulsamad P. Bogabong (hereafter complainant) was the elected First Kagawad of Barangay Bubonga Marawi who assumed the office of Barangay Chairman in a hold-over capacity after the death of incumbent Dianisia P. Bacarat. In April 2008 the Provincial Director of the DILG for Lanao del Sur issued certifications attesting to complainant’s assumption. On April 10, 2008 however, Marawi City Mayor Fahad U. Salic appointed Omera Hadji Isa‑Ali (Omera) as Barangay Chairman, and a subsequent DILG provincial certification (May 7, 2008) recognized Omera.
Complainant contested Omera’s appointment before DILG‑ARMM; a DILG‑ARMM resolution dated May 5, 2009 again acknowledged complainant as the legitimate Barangay Chairman, and complainant resumed possession and withdrew the barangay’s May 2009 Internal Revenue Allotment (IRA). Omera then filed a quo warranto petition (Special Civil Action No. 1879‑09) against complainant in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Marawi City, Branch 8.
Respondent Judge Rasad G. Balindong (respondent-judge), acting as Presiding Judge, granted Omera a temporary restraining order (TRO) on July 2, 2009 and subsequently issued a writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) on July 22, 2009 directing complainant and the Land Bank of the Philippines to cease disbursing the barangay’s IRA. In an August 24, 2009 Decision the RTC granted Omera’s quo warranto petition, holding that complainant had waived his right by failing to assume office within one year and two months after Bacarat’s death.
Omera moved for execution pending appeal; in an August 28, 2009 Order respondent‑judge granted the motion and issued a writ of execution directing release of the IRA. Complainant appealed the decision (CA‑G.R. SP No. 03135‑MIN) and filed a Rule 65 petition to annul the execution‑pending‑appeal order (CA‑G.R. SP No. 03152‑MIN); the Court of Appeals consolidated the cases. In its September 13, 2012 Decision the Court of Appeals (CA) reversed the RTC, declared complainant the rightful Barangay Chairman for the 2007–2010 term, nullified the RTC’s order granting execution pending appeal for lack of evidence of the alleged “good reasons,” and held that the TRO/WPI were issued without requiring bonds as mandated by Rule 58, Section 4.
The CA decision formed the basis of a letter‑complaint filed by complainant before the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), charging respondent‑judge with gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of authority and partiality. Respondent‑judge denied culpability, asserting impartiality, that any error was merely one of judgment, and faulting complainant for not posting a supersedeas bond under Section 3, Rule 39.
The OCA, after review, recommended a finding of guilt for gross ignorance of the law and grave abuse of authority, and proposed substantial fines to be deducted from respondent‑judge’s retirement benefits. The OCA relied on the CA’s findings that respondent‑judge (a) recognized an appointee despite the rule of automatic succession for permanent vacancies, (b) issued TRO/WPI without requiring bonds under Section 4, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, and (c) allowed execution pending appeal without evidentiary support as required by Section 2(a), Rule 39 of the Rules of Court. The OCA also noted respondent‑judge’s prior administrative sanctions in Benito v. Balindong and ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is respondent Judge Rasad G. Balindong administratively liable for gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of authority and related misconduct in (a) recognizing Omera by mayoral appointment despite the rule of automatic succession, (b) issuing a TRO/WPI without requiring the posting of a bond, and (c) granting execution pending appeal without evidentiary support?
- If liable, what penalty is appropriate given respondent‑judge’s ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)