Case Digest (A.M. No. MTJ-92-687)
Facts:
Engineer Edgardo C. Garcia v. Judge Meljohn de la Pena, A.M. No. MTJ-92-687, February 09, 1994, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam. The administrative complaint was filed by Engr. Edgardo C. Garcia on June 18, 1992 charging Judge Meljohn de la Pena, then acting judge of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of Naval, Leyte (and incumbent presiding judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Caibiran-Culaba, Leyte), with partiality, abuse of authority and grave abuse of discretion in connection with Criminal Case No. 2577 for grave oral defamation filed by Dr. Melencio B. de la Pena (the judge’s brother) against Ignacia G. Garcia (complainant’s wife).The criminal complaint for grave oral defamation was filed on June 8, 1992 with the MTC of Naval, Leyte and, after preliminary examination, Judge de la Pena issued a warrant of arrest the same day. Engr. Garcia posted cash bail (P2,000) on June 8, 1992 and sought approval of the cash bond and the Order of Release at about 2:40 P.M., but the judge was not in his office. The Order of Release, although prepared, was said to have been entrusted to the judge’s wife; the judge left for Cebu that afternoon for an alleged pre-scheduled medical check-up. The accused remained in municipal jail until about 10:10 A.M. on June 9, 1992, spending roughly twenty hours in detention. Copies of the complaint, affidavits and the judge’s inhibition order were received only on June 15, 1992.
Complainant filed this administrative case on July 22, 1992; a similar complaint was earlier filed with the Office of the Ombudsman (Visayas) docketed OMB VIS-92-397 (filed July 16, 1992). On November 19, 1992 the Supreme Court required respondent to file his comment and referred the matter to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) for evaluation. The OCA submitted its memorandum with recommendation on July 20, 1993. Respondent’s comment adopted his Ombudsman pleadings, asserting inter alia that certification from the Lupon Tagapayapa under P.D. No. 1508 was unnecessary because grave oral defamation is outside its coverage; that issuance of a warrant is ministerial where probable cause exists; that he had informed his Clerk of Court of his planned trip and left an Order of Release with his wife; that the posted cash bond was defective for lacking the written undertaking required by Section 11, Rule 114 of the Rules of Court; and that he inhibited himself on June 15, 1992.
The OCA record also showed a prior administrative disciplinary proceeding against respondent (A.M. No. R-48-MTJ, Ragir v. de la Pena) for jurisdictional error in a frustrated murder case, which resulted in a fine equivalent to one month’...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is the Supreme Court barred from exercising disciplinary authority over a judge by a prior dismissal of related criminal charges by the Office of the Ombudsman?
- Did Judge Meljohn de la Pena violate the rule on compulsory disqualification and the Canons of Judicial Conduct by taking cognizance of a case filed by his brother and, relatedly, did his subsequent acts (issuance of warrant, leaving town, leaving the Order of Release with his wife) con...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)