A.M. No. RTJ-12-2333 - Casar vs. Soluren

An administrative complaint was filed on August 12, 2011, by Assistant Provincial Prosecutors Hydierabad A. Casar, Jonald E. Hernandez, Dante P. Sindac, and Atty. Jobert D. Reyes of the Public Attorney's Office in Baler, Aurora.
The complaint charged Judge Corazon D. Soluren, then Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 96, Baler, Aurora, with Gross Misconduct.

Complainants alleged that on June 20, 22, and July 19, 2011, Judge Soluren made unauthorized visits to the Aurora Provincial Jail.
During these visits, she conferred with inmates, including those who had pending cases before her sala.
The visits were in violation of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) Circular No. 03-2010, which suspended jail visitations by Executive and Presiding Judges pending further review of earlier Supreme Court issuances.

The complaint asserted that the judge’s purpose in visiting the jail was to persuade detention inmates to sign a letter directed to then Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.
The letter called for the dismissal of an administrative complaint previously filed against her by Atty. Juliet M. Isidro-Reyes, District Public Attorney, and for the removal of Judge Evelyn Atienza-Turla as Presiding Judge of RTC, Branch 6, Baler, Aurora.
Evidence presented included:

A certification by the Prison Guard Administrator attesting to the unauthorized jail visits.
An affidavit by Dolores P. Sollano, who accompanied Judge Soluren during the visits.
A handwritten letter by the detention prisoners, later stating that they did not understand the significance of the letter and sought to withdraw their participation.

In her Comment dated November 5, 2011, Judge Soluren admitted to visiting the Aurora Provincial Jail on four occasions.
She maintained that these were not official visitations since they were conducted without the presence and assistance of her staff and in non-compliance with Supreme Court orders.

The Office of the Court Administrator issued a Report on August 17, 2012, recommending the imposition of administrative sanctions.
The report found Judge Soluren guilty of Simple Misconduct.
A penalty was recommended: a fine of Ten Thousand Pesos (P10,000.00), to be deducted from her retirement or gratuity benefits.
The Court adopted the recommendation, thereby finalizing the finding against her.

The Court underscored that judges must observe strict standards of judicial propriety, avoiding both actual impropriety and even the mere appearance of it.
The conduct of soliciting signatures from detention inmates was deemed an abuse of judicial authority and a potential source of bias, which could erode public confidence in the judiciary.

Whether Judge Soluren’s unauthorized visits to the Aurora Provincial Jail constituted judicial misconduct.

Examination of the conduct of conferring with inmates in the absence of proper procedural safeguards.
Consideration of whether such conduct was intended to influence judicial proceedings or gain personal advantage.

Whether the appearance of impropriety arising from her actions undermined public confidence in the judicial system.

Evaluation of the responsibilities placed upon judges to avoid situations where their impartiality could be questioned.
Discussion on the broader ethical implications of a judge interacting directly with detainees, especially those with cases before her.

Whether the imposition of a fine deducted from retirement benefits was appropriate and supported by the investigation and evidence presented.

Analysis of the procedural compliance in addressing administrative complaints against judges.
Consideration of prior judicial disciplinary precedents and standards.