Case Digest (A.M. No. RTJ 98-1400)
Facts:
Carlos Dionisio v. Hon. Zosimo V. Escano, A.M. No. RTJ-98-1400, February 01, 1999, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam.Complainant Carlos Dionisio filed an administrative letter-complaint dated October 8, 1997 accusing respondent Judge Zosimo V. Escano (then judge of RTC, Branch 259, Parañaque) of (a) using court facilities — specifically posting employment notices on the court bulletin board and receiving applicants at his court address — to promote a private eating/entertainment establishment, and (b) causing construction of an extension office called the "Office of Negotiable Cases" allegedly after he acquitted a certain Jia Hung in a criminal case.
An October 19, 1997 advertisement for Fontana Cafe & Restaurant (later characterized in evidence as intended to be a pub/cafe) seeking "Attractive Waitresses" and "Female Vocalists" prompted an undercover ABS-CBN "Hoy Gising!" staffer to pose as an applicant and secretly videotape an interview with Judge Escano in his chamber. The videotape, appended to the complaint, recorded Escano admitting ownership of the establishment and making remarks about the attire and conduct expected of applicants; he later characterized the place as a restaurant and claimed he was merely helping his wife, who had secured a DTI Certificate of Registration for the business.
Judge Escano admitted posting the notices on the court bulletin board and interviewing about five applicants in his office, explained he removed the posters when informed of the impropriety, and denied that an "Office of Negotiable Cases" existed, asserting the extension structure was built by the Municipal Government as a stockroom/office for court staff. He also submitted performance records and attached decisions (including in People v. Xiao Jia Hung) to show impartiality in his judicial work.
The administrative complaint was referred to the Court of Appeals for investigation, report and recommendation on January 19, 1998 and assigned to Justice Minerva P. Gonzaga-Reyes. The Investigating Justice found that Escano had posted the advertisement on the court bulletin board for one to two weeks, interviewed applicants in his chamber, made the suggestive remarks captured on videotape, and that the establishment was originally intended as a pub. The Investigating Justice recommended dismissal of the "Office of Negotiable Cases" charge but recommended a fine of P15,000.00 as penalty, noting mitigating circumstances such as apology and prompt removal of the notices.
The Supreme Court En Banc reviewed the report and recommendation and rendered a per curiam decision disciplining Judge Escano. The Court considered the Code of Judicial Ethics (Canon...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was the charge that Judge Escano caused the construction of an "Office of Negotiable Cases" substantiated by competent evidence?
- Did Judge Escano’s posting of employment notices on the court bulletin board, use of his court address and chamber to screen applicants, and related conduct constitute misconduct in violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics?
- If misconduct was established, was the Investigating Justice’s recommended penalty of a P15,000.00 fine appropriate...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)