Case Digest (A.M. No. RTJ-24-064)
Facts:
Honorable Leo L. Intia, Presiding Judge, Branch 27, Regional Trial Court, Naga City, Camarines Sur, Complainant, vs. Honorable Erwin Virgilio P. Ferrer, Executive Judge and Presiding Judge, Branch 20, Regional Trial Court, Naga City, Camarines Sur, Respondent, A.M. No. RTJ-24-064 [Formerly JIB FPI No. 21-021-RTJ], May 13, 2024, the Supreme Court Second Division, Lazaro-Javier, J., writing for the Court.In a letter-complaint dated November 6, 2020, Judge Leo L. Intia charged Executive Judge Erwin Virgilio P. Ferrer (ret.) with (a) coaxing Atty. Noe B. Botor to act against Judge Intia; (b) engaging in an insurance business as an insurance agent or broker in violation of court circulars; and (c) violating Supreme Court circulars on the timely disposition of cases involving persons deprived of liberty (PDLs). Judge Intia’s letter grew out of an October 19, 2020 inhibition order in Criminal Case Nos. 2019-0822 and 2019-0823 in which his footnotes included detailed allegations about Judge Ferrer’s alleged temperament and conduct toward court personnel and litigants.
Judge Intia submitted as exhibits a lease contract and receipts he said showed Judge Ferrer’s insurance business, and an Updated List of PDLs (November 6, 2020) provided by a provincial jail warden showing at least 55 pending cases, some with multi-year incarcerations. Judge Intia asserted these demonstrated noncompliance with Supreme Court circulars and alleged that Judge Ferrer had instigated Atty. Botor’s motion for inhibition.
In his Verified Comment (July 28, 2021) and subsequent pleadings, Judge Ferrer (ret.) explained his role as Executive Judge and member of the raffle committee, denied instigating Atty. Botor (who executed an affidavit denying any such instigation), and explained the insurance business as a family enterprise managed by a third party and declared in his SALN. He also presented the branch clerk of court’s explanations that PDL cases were included in monthly and semestral reports and that many matters had valid resettings; he invoked an OCA judicial audit conducted June 22–30, 2022, preparatory to his compulsory retirement.
The Office of the Judicial Integrity Board (JIB) proceeded: the Acting Executive Director (DCC Navarrete) on February 16, 2023 recommended dismissal for lack of merit; but the JIB on February 21, 2024 recommended re‑docketing as a regular administrative matter and found Judge Ferrer (ret.) guilty of simple misconduct for violating the New Code of Judicial Conduct (and Administrative Circular No. 5), recommending a fine of PHP 18,000 and dismissal of the other charges. The JIB treated the insurance-business charge as warranting discipline despite lack of proof of solicitation, concluding ownership alone breached the absolute prohibition of Administrative Circular No. 5.
The Supreme Court adopted the JIB’s factual findings and legal conclusions in the main but imposed a different penalty. The Court dismissed the charges concerning the staff‑meeting outburst (already resolved in OCA IPI No. 21‑5116‑RTJ), the alleged maltreatment of Barangay Captain Rodriguez and PO1 Jacob (based on hearsay and absence of affidavits), the allegation that Judge Ferrer induced Atty. Botor (contradicted by Atty. Botor’s affidavit), and the PDL‑case delay claim (not substantiated ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Is Judge Intia’s charge of unbecoming conduct against Judge Ferrer relating to the staff meeting and prior outbursts reviewable here, or is it barred by resolution in OCA IPI No. 21-5116-RTJ?
- Can hearsay (reports relayed to Judge Intia by third parties) sustain the maltreatment charges against Judge Ferrer toward Barangay Captain Rodriguez and PO1 Jacob?
- Was there substantial evidence that Judge Ferrer influenced Atty. Botor to file allegations against Judge Intia?
- Did Judge Ferrer unduly delay the disposition of cases involving PDLs in violation of the Constitution and Court circulars?
- Did Judge Ferrer violate Administrative Circular No. 5 by engaging i...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)