Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-03-1505)

Case Overview

The case involves a verified complaint filed by Mamasaw Sultan Ali against Hon. Baguinda Ali Pacalna, Judge, Hon. Pundaya A. Berua, Acting Presiding Judge, Hadji Ibra Darimbang, Clerk of Court, and Mandag U. Batua-an, Court Stenographer, all of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court in Balindong, Lanao del Sur. The complaint alleges grave abuse of discretion, dishonesty, gross ignorance of the law, and misconduct in relation to Election Case No. 2002-10-M concerning voter registration.

Background of the Complaint

• Filing of Petitions: On January 18, 2002, Sultan Ali and other residents filed 20 petitions for inclusion in the permanent voters’ list, where Sultan Ali was the petitioner for Election Case No. 2002-10-M.
• Lack of Registration: Petitioners were unable to register due to unavailability of forms and were advised by the Assistant Election Officer to list their names for future inclusion.
• Delay in Proceedings: There was significant inaction from Judge Pacalna regarding the petitions, leading to delays in hearings and procedural irregularities.

Procedural Irregularities

• Failure to Hear Petitions Promptly: The court did not act on the petitions for over three months, which violated the statutory requirement that such cases be heard within ten days from filing.
• Involvement of Intervenor: Atty. Usop, counsel for the incumbent mayor, intervened despite not filing a formal motion, leading to procedural confusion and objections from Sultan Ali’s counsel.
• Dismissal of Petitions: The petitions were dismissed based on allegations that the Assistant Election Officer’s signature was obtained under duress without allowing proper cross-examination or due process.

Findings of the Court

• Dishonesty and Fabrication: The Court found that Judge Pacalna fabricated an order granting intervention, which never officially existed. This act constituted dishonesty as it aimed to cover up procedural failures.
• Gross Ignorance of Law: The judge failed to comply with the legal procedures for handling election cases, which resulted in denying the petitioners their rights.

Legal Principles and Violations

• Judicial Procedure Violations: Under the Voter Registration Act, specific rules govern the judicial proceedings for inclusion, which include:
  • Timely setting of hearings
  • Proper notification to all affected parties
  • Ensuring evidence is presented in a manner consistent with due process
• Consequences of Violations: The failure to adhere to these procedures resulted in the dismissal of the petitions and denial of the complainant’s candidacy.

Penalties and Recommendations

• Judge Pacalna: Found administratively liable for dishonesty and gross ignorance, resulting in a fine of P20,000. A warning was issued regarding future conduct.
• Court Stenographer Batua-an: Reprimanded for failing to sign the transcript of proceedings, with a similar warning for future violations.

Key Takeaways

• The case illustrates the importance

...continue reading

Case Syllabus (A.M. No. MTJ-03-1505)

Background of the Case

• Complainant Mamasaw Sultan Ali filed a verified complaint on January 30, 2003, against respondents Judge Baguinda Ali Pacalna, Judge Pundaya A. Berua, Clerk of Court Hadji Ibra Darimbang, and Court Stenographer Mandag U. Batua-an.
• The complaint alleged grave abuse of discretion, dishonesty, gross ignorance of the law, grave misconduct, and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service related to Election Case No. 2002-10-M.
• On January 18, 2002, Ali and other residents filed 20 petitions for inclusion in the permanent list of voters, which were assigned to the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) of Balindong, Lanao Del Sur.

Petition for Inclusion

• The petitions were based on the claim that during the general voter registration on December 26, 2001, the complainant and others could not register due to a lack of registration forms.
• They were advised by Assistant Election Officer Amerogong Tumara to list their names for future certification, which Tumara signed, confirming their failure to register was not their fault.

Court Proceedings and Delays

• The notice of hearing was issued, stating that the petitions would be considered on a date in February 2002, but Judge Pacalna failed to act on the petitions until May 2002.
• A hearing was eventually set for May 9, 2002, where Judge Pacalna sought to ascertain the authenticity of Tumara’s signature, despite no challenge to it by the complainants.
• Tumara failed to appear at the hearing but sent a letter requesting a reschedule due to personal issues.

Irregularities During Hearings

• The

...continue reading