Case Digest (A.M. No. 99-11-158-MTC)
Facts:
- An administrative case originated from a Memorandum dated August 17, 1999, by Executive Judge Pedro M. Sunga of the RTC, Branch 42, San Fernando, Pampanga.
- The Memorandum requested information from Judge Daniel B. Liangco regarding the assignment of twenty-nine cases for violation of Presidential Decree No. 1602 (Jueteng) filed in July 1999.
- Juanita Flores, Clerk of Court II of the MTC, reported irregularities in the assignment of these cases.
- Judge Liangco responded on August 20, 1999, stating all twenty-nine cases were assigned to Branch 1, which he presided over.
- Judge Sunga later found that fifty-five jueteng cases had been filed, with fifty-three assigned to Branch 1, raising concerns about the fairness of the assignment process.
- Judge Liangco explained that the assignment aimed to allow detained accused to post bail without waiting for raffle dates, but this was met with skepticism.
- Clerk Flores revealed that jueteng cases were not being raffled and were automatically retained by Branch 1.
- Following investigations, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended holding Judge Liangco accountable for improper case assignments.
- On November 9, 1999, the Court En Banc adopted the OCA's recommendations, leading to further explanations from Judge Liangco.
- Ultimately, the Court found serious breaches of duty and imposed a six-month suspension instead of dismissal.
Issue:
- (Unlock)
Ruling:
- Yes, the Court ruled that Judge Liangco violated Supreme Court Circular No. 7 by directly assigning cases for violation of P.D. 1602 to his branch without a proper raffle.
- The Court imposed a six-month suspension without p...(Unlock)
Ratio:
- The Court emphasized the necessity for judges to maintain integrity and impartiality, as their actions significantly affect public confidence in the judiciary.
- Judge Liangco's practice of assigning cases without a proper raffle was a clear violation of Supreme Court Circular No. 7, which mandates fair and transparent case assignments.
- The statistical improbability of having fifty-three out of fifty-five cases assigned to one branch raised s...continue reading
Case Digest (A.M. No. 99-11-158-MTC)
Facts:
The administrative case arose from a Memorandum dated August 17, 1999, issued by Executive Judge Pedro M. Sunga of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 42, San Fernando, Pampanga, directed to Judge Daniel B. Liangco, the Executive Judge of the Municipal Trial Court (MTC) of San Fernando, Pampanga. The Memorandum requested information regarding the assignment of twenty-nine (29) cases for violation of Presidential Decree No. 1602 (Jueteng) filed in July 1999. Prior to this, Juanita Flores, Clerk of Court II of the MTC, had been reporting irregularities in the assignment of these cases. In response to the Memorandum, Judge Liangco submitted a letter on August 20, 1999, stating that all twenty-nine cases were assigned to Branch 1, which he presided over. However, Judge Sunga later discovered that fifty-five (55) jueteng cases had been filed, with fifty-three (53) assigned to Branch 1, raising concerns about the fairness of the raffle process.
Judge Sunga subsequently required Judge Liangco and other court officials to explain the case assignment process. Judge Liangco explained that the assignment was due to the necessity of allowing detained accused to post bail without waiting for scheduled raffle dates. This explanation was met with skepticism, as Clerk of Court Flores revealed that jueteng cases were not being raffled and were automatically retained by Branch 1. Other judges also noted the irregularity in the assignment of these cases. Following a series of communications and investigations, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended that Judge Liangco be held accountable for the improper assignment of cases without a proper raffle, which violated Supreme Court Circular No. 7.
On November 9, 1999, the Court En Banc adopted the ...