Title
Ecube-Badel vs. Badel
Case
A.M. No. P-97-1248
Decision Date
Jun 13, 1997
A court stenographer admitted to immorality and perjury after confessing to an illicit relationship and lying under oath, resulting in a one-year suspension.
A

Case Summary (A.M. No. P-97-1248)

Allegations and Denials

Petitioner Mariel Ecube-Badel filed a formal complaint against her husband, accusing him of engaging in illicit relations with Cristina Dalida, which purportedly resulted in the birth of a child named Ma. Christian David Badel. In addition to this, the complaint included allegations that the respondent failed to pay a promissory note amounting to P3,000.00 for the support of their daughter Ivy Cherryki, as mandated by a prior court decision. Respondent David de la Peña denied these allegations, asserting that he had separated from the complainant, lived alone, and fulfilled his financial obligations to their daughter, although he confessed to owing an additional amount.

Investigation and Withdrawal of Complaint

An investigation was conducted by Judge Abraham D. CaÁa of the Regional Trial Court. During this proceeding, the complainant retracted her allegations, indicating that her knowledge of the supposed illicit relationship and child was based on hearsay. She submitted an affidavit of desistance, expressing her decision not to pursue the case. However, the respondent reiterated his denial of paternity regarding Ma. Christian David Badel and provided a narrative about his strained relationship with his wife, the separation that followed, and his life with Cristina Dalida and their child.

Admission of Guilt

Despite the initial denial, an important development occurred on December 5, 1996, when the respondent submitted an affidavit of confession acknowledging the extramarital relationship with Cristina Dalida and admitting to be the father of her child. He explained the emotional burden he felt due to his previous falsehoods under oath and expressed a desire for forgiveness, elucidating the circumstances that led him to confess.

Consequences and Recommendations

Upon reviewing the investigative findings, Judge CaÁa categorized the actions of the respondent as constituting immorality and perjury. The judge recommended a suspension of one year without pay. The court identified immorality as a grave offense under Rule XIV, A23(o) of the Civil Service Rules, which entails suspension from six months and one day to a year for a first offense, and potentially dismissal for subsequent offenses.

Court's Decision

The court concurred with the findings of the investigating judge, asserting that the respondent's actions were not only unworthy of his position but also demonstrated a breach of public trust. However, the court considered whether this incident constituted a first offense or a second offense, given the respondent's continued illicit relationship despite his admissions. The court determined that the

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.