IN RE: Borromeo

Facts:

In re Joaquin T. Borromeo, A.M. No. 93-7-696-0, February 21, 1995, the Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam.
The relator was the Cebu City Chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines; the proceeding was instituted against respondent Joaquin T. Borromeo for contempt.

Respondent Borromeo, a non‑lawyer, repeatedly litigated over a period of about sixteen years (from 1978 onward) arising principally from loan and mortgage transactions with three banks: Traders Royal Bank (TRB), United Coconut Planters Bank (UCPB), and Security Bank & Trust Co. (SBTC). He defaulted on several obligations secured by mortgages and letters of credit; the banks foreclosed and consolidated titles. Borromeo pursued a large number of civil, criminal and administrative actions — the resolution catalogs roughly fifty original or review proceedings — against the banks, bank officers, their counsel, prosecutors, trial judges, Court of Appeals justices and Supreme Court justices, as well as court clerks. His filings included repetitious suits, certiorari petitions, and criminal complaints; many matters were dismissed for res judicata, litis pendentia, lack of merit, prematurity, or for failing to comply with procedural requisites.

Numerous lower‑court and appellate dispositions are summarized in the record: among them, adverse final rulings to Borromeo in Civil Case No. R‑22506 (TRB) affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA G.R. CV No. 07015) and by the Supreme Court (G.R. No. 83306); dismissal of successive refiled suits as res judicata or litis pendentia (e.g., RTC CEB‑8750 affirmed in CA G.R. SP No. 22356; CEB‑9485 dismissed and CA G.R. SP No. 28221 denied); criminal complaints he filed were dismissed by prosecutors (e.g., I.S. Nos. 90‑1187/88, 87‑3795, 89‑4234, 88‑205 to 88‑207); his petition in the criminal Trust Receipts case was denied by the Court of Appeals (CA G.R. SP No. 28275) and this Court dismissed his subsequent petition (G.R. No. 112928) for failure to comply with internal circulars. Parallel litigation involving UCPB (e.g., RTC R‑21009; CA CV‑07396; G.R. No. 82273) and SBTC (RTC R‑21615; CA G.R. No. 20617; G.R. No. 94769) likewise ended against him at various levels.

Beyond court pleadings, Borromeo composed and circulated numerous letters, flyers and “circulars” publicly accusing judges, justices, court clerks and lawyers of corruption, usurpation and constitutional violation — repeatedly asserting that "minute resolutions" issued without justices' signatures were unconstitutional and charging the courts with sanctioning wrongdoing by banks. Copies of these publications reached members of the IBP Cebu City Chapter, which sent a letter (June 21, 1992) urging the Supreme Court to impose sanctions.

Acting on that communication and on the record of Borromeo's repetitive and abusive filings and public attacks, the Court En Banc on July 22, 1993 required Borromeo to comment and ordered personal service. Borromeo filed comments (Aug. 27, 1993) and supplemental filings; the Court on September...(Pro-only)

Issues:

• Is respondent Joaquin T. Borromeo guilty of contempt for repetitious, harassing litigation and for circulating scurrilous publications that impede the administration of justice?
• May the Supreme Court, without intervention of a prosecuting officer, institute and try contempt proceedings against a person who complains of the Court or its members (i.e., must the Chief Justice and other Members inhibit themselves)?
• Do respondent’s assertions of constitutional rights of free speech and of petition shield him from contempt for his publications and repetitive suits?
...(Pro-only)

Ruling:

• (Pro-only)

Ratio:

• (Pro-only)

Doctrine:

• (Pro-only)