G.R. No. 188773 - Heirs of Basbas vs. Basbas

Complainant Samuel N. Rodriguez took over the operations of Golden Dragon International Terminals, Inc. (GDITI) at MAKAR Wharf, General Santos City after the implementation of a Writ of Preliminary Mandatory Injunction (as amended) dated January 8, 2014.
GDITI, engaged in receiving and disposing of both liquid and solid wastes generated by docking vessels, was previously managed by Cirilo Basalo. The injunction was aimed at halting Basalo’s continued handling of operations.

On June 26, 2015, while inspecting the operations at GDITI accompanied by the court sheriff, Rodriguez observed a truck—purportedly owned by Basalo—transporting solid wastes from a docking vessel.
As Rodriguez documented the scene with photographs, another vehicle driven by Basalo suddenly attempted to sideswipe him.
Despite his efforts to dodge, Rodriguez was struck as he chased the vehicle, and while on the ground, another vehicle stopped and armed men emerged, pointing their guns at him. He managed to escape by running and hiding.

In response to the physical incident, Rodriguez filed a complaint for Frustrated Murder on June 29, 2015 against Basalo and his companions.
On the previous day, June 28, 2015, respondent Judge Oscar P. Noel, Jr. issued a Temporary Release Order granting bail to Basalo and his companion Arjay J. Balansag, raising questions regarding the timing and propriety of the action.

In Civil Case No. 8588, on July 10, 2015, respondent issued a 72‑hour TRO enjoining Rodriguez from performing any act that might lead to violence, and directed him to maintain the status quo in GDITI.
A Notice of Special Raffle was concurrently issued and received by Rodriguez’s relative, adding to the complexity of the case.
Unexpectedly, on July 14, 2015, the TRO was extended for an additional twenty (20) days—far exceeding the original 72‑hour period—without furnishing Rodriguez with a copy of the notice of hearing for its extension.

In a Memorandum dated January 15, 2018, the OCA recommended reprimanding respondent Judge Noel for gross ignorance of the law concerning the TRO, noting that the order was improperly extended beyond the statutory period.
The OCA held that the extension violated Section 5, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, which clearly limits any TRO’s total effectivity to no more than twenty (20) days including the initial 72‑hour period.
Notably, the OCA was silent on the issuance of the Temporary Release Order in Misc. Case No. 3957, leaving that matter to be addressed by the Court’s administrative supervision.

Whether respondent Judge Oscar P. Noel, Jr. should be held administratively liable for violating the Rules of Court and the Code of Judicial Conduct.
Whether his conduct amounts to gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of discretion, and demonstrates bias and partiality in the performance of his judicial duties.

Whether the issuance of the Temporary Release Order on June 28, 2015—prior to the actual filing of the petition for bail on the next working day (June 29, 2015)—was procedurally proper, especially given the circumstances on a Sunday when government offices were closed.
Whether the extension of the 72‑hour TRO on July 14, 2015, thereby reviving an already expired order and extending it to a full twenty (20) days, violated the explicit limits set forth by the Rules of Court.

Whether the Court, under Section 6, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, could exercise administrative supervision and directly rule on the administrative charge even in the absence of explicit findings from the OCA regarding the Temporary Release Order issue.