A.M. No. RTJ-16-2424 - Office of the Court Administrator vs. Justalero

Judge Globert J. Justalero was designated as the Presiding Judge of Branch 32, Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Iloilo City.
Under Administrative Order No. 12-2010, he was also designated as the Assisting Judge of Branch 66, RTC of Barotac Viejo to take cognizance of cases previously handled by Judge Amular.
New cases in Barotac Viejo were raffled between Judge Justalero and Judge Rogelio Amador at a 2:1 ratio.

A regular judicial audit conducted from April 20 to May 3, 2015 on nullity of marriage cases revealed several procedural irregularities.

Cases were disposed within an unusually short period—several cases decided within six months and, in some instances, within one to three days after the filing of memoranda.
Numerous anomalies were noted such as:

Failure to furnish copies of orders and notices to the Office of the Solicitor General.
Proceedings continued despite the non-appearance of the Office of the Solicitor General.
Simultaneous or nearly simultaneous issuance of collusion investigation orders and related reports.
Improper timing in the issuance of orders regarding service of summons, collusion reports, and formal offers of evidence.
Discrepancies in the return of service which showed signatories without the necessary authentication.

A discreet investigation conducted from August 10 to 14, 2015 in the RTC of Barotac Viejo confirmed the irregular pace and procedural lapses.

It was observed that Judge Justalero disposed of an extraordinarily high number of nullity cases despite hearing cases only on Fridays.
These discrepancies raised questions regarding the soundness of the judicial process in his sala.

The judicial audit also highlighted issues in the solemnization of marriages at the RTC of Barotac Viejo.

Judge Justalero, not vested with the administrative function to solemnize marriages in that branch, was found to have performed such ceremonies.
Questions arose regarding the high volume of marriages he officiated despite his limited schedule.
Several marriages were conducted under Article 34 of the Family Code, with immediate registration of certificates and notarization of affidavits of cohabitation by Judge Justalero himself, often with minimal requirement for proof of identity.

On November 23, 2015, the Office of the Court Administrator issued a memorandum recommending:

The preventive suspension of Judge Justalero as Presiding Judge of Branch 32.
The designation of an Acting Presiding Judge for Branch 32.
The revocation of his designation as Assisting Judge of Branch 66, RTC of Barotac Viejo.
The referral of all pending cases from Branch 66 to Judge Amador.

The memorandum demanded that Judge Justalero explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him.
This memorandum was treated as the formal administrative complaint when, on January 20, 2016, the Court adopted its recommendations.

His rapid disposition of cases was in conformity with the Rules of Procedure.
The handling of summons, collusion reports, and missing records was due to the functions assigned to court personnel and public prosecutors.
His practice of solemnizing marriages was based on historical precedent among assisting judges and instructions from Judge Amador.

He contended that his practices did not necessarily contravene any rules, emphasizing his efforts to reduce case backlogs and expedite the judicial process.

The Office of the Court Administrator and subsequent judicial findings determined:

Judge Justalero exhibited gross ignorance of the law and procedural rules in handling nullity cases.
His conduct in solemnizing marriages and notarizing affidavits of cohabitation exceeded his judicial authority.
His repeated procedural lapses and unauthorized administrative actions demonstrated a lack of competence and probity.

The Court ultimately imposed a sanction: suspension from office without salary and other benefits for one (1) year, along with a stern warning against future similar offenses.

Whether his expedited disposal of nullity cases and unauthorized conduct in solemnizing marriages and notarizing affidavits of cohabitation violated established judicial rules and administrative orders.