Case Summary (A.M. No. MTJ-04-1564)
Allegations Against the Respondent
In his verified administrative complaint filed on August 4, 2003, Atty. Go claimed that Judge Achas, though married to Angeles Roa-Achas, had been cohabiting with Ma. Paz Gendrada Go, a married woman and an agent of a bonding company. The relationship, according to the complainant, was scandalous, particularly since Mrs. Go frequently interacted with court litigants, facilitating bail bonds for individuals involved in cases before Judge Achas. He asserted that the judge attempted to solicit clients for Mrs. Go, further contributing to the perceived impropriety.
Issues Surrounding Supersedeas Bond
A significant aspect of the complaint revolved around the handling of a supersedeas bond in the amount of P290,000.00 associated with Civil Case No. 1510-MTCC. Atty. Go alleged that Judge Achas issued an informal receipt for the bond instead of properly depositing it with the Clerk of Court, as mandated by Rule 70 of the Rules of Court. A certification from the Clerk of Court dated July 14, 2003, directly supported this claim, stating that the amount at issue had not been deposited officially.
Response from the Respondent
Judge Achas responded to the allegations, asserting that his relationship with Mrs. Go was purely professional, alleging he hired her as a nurse due to his health issues. He admitted to receiving the supersedeas bond but claimed it was merely for safekeeping, contending that there was no misconduct and denying the allegation of cohabitation with Mrs. Go. Furthermore, he indicated that Atty. Go had ulterior motives for filing the complaint, suggesting animosity due to pending criminal cases involving Go's associates.
Administrative Investigation and Findings
The case was referred by the Court to Executive Judge Salome P. Dungog for investigation and recommendation. During the hearings, Atty. Go failed to appear, leading to questions regarding his interest in proceeding with the case. Ultimately, Executive Judge Dungog recommended the dismissal of the complaint on the grounds of Atty. Go's apparent lack of interest.
Court's Analysis of the Case
The higher court did not concur with the Executive Judge's recommendation. It emphasized that the burden of proof in administrative cases lies with the complainant. The court cited the importance of credible evidence and the presumption of regularity in the conduct of judicial duties. It stated that simply withdrawing a complaint does not preclude the court from investigating the allegations if supported by sufficient evidence.
Conclusive Findings on Charges
While Atty. Go's assertions about the alleged affair with Mrs. Go lacked supporting evidence, the court recognized that Judge Achas did receive the supersedeas bond without immediately depositing it as required. This violation of procedural rules constituted gross misconduct, warranting disciplinary action. The co
...continue readingCase Syllabus (A.M. No. MTJ-04-1564)
Background of the Case
- Atty. Alvin C. Go filed a verified administrative complaint against Judge Rio Concepcion Achas on August 4, 2003.
- The complaint charged Judge Achas with immorality, gross misconduct, dishonesty, and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
- Atty. Go alleged that Judge Achas, despite being married to Angeles Roa-Achas, was cohabiting with Ma. Paz Gendrada Go, a married woman, at the Royal Gem Apartelle in Clarin, Misamis Occidental.
- Atty. Go claimed that this relationship was scandalous because Mrs. Go was an agent of a bonding company that posted bail bonds for defendants in Judge Achas's court.
- Allegations included that Judge Achas solicited party litigants to become clients of Mrs. Go, and that she was seen frequently in his chambers.
- Atty. Go highlighted an incident where Mrs. Go posted a bond using a falsified certification for an accused in a criminal case.
Allegations of Misconduct
- Atty. Go claimed that Judge Achas received a supersedeas bond of P290,000.00 for a Civil Case and kept it, violating proper procedures outlined in the Rules of Court.
- The complainant provided a certification from the Clerk of Court indicating that the cash bond was not deposited as required.
- Additional allegations included Judge Achas's involvement in cockfighting, which Atty. Go argued was inappropriate behavior for a judge.