Case Summary (G.R. No. 143313)
Petitioner
Complainants filed an administrative complaint alleging violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, the Rule on Gender-Fair Language, use of foul or discriminatory language, discrimination against women, and general unethical conduct by Judge Rufon.
Respondent
Judge Anastacio C. Rufon denied all allegations in his January 20, 2006 comment, characterizing his language as “frank” and “strong,” attributing any excesses to human frailty and occasional after-hours drinking.
Key Dates
• February 11, 2005 – Letter-complaint filed
• January 20, 2006 – Respondent’s comment filed
• July 13, 2006 – Preliminary conference conducted in CA
• November 8, 2006 – Affidavit of Cynthia Bagtas-Serios submitted
• March 5, 2007 – Investigating justice’s Report and Recommendation submitted
• October 19, 2007 – En Banc decision
Applicable Law
• 1987 Philippine Constitution (benchmarks for judicial integrity and public confidence)
• New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary, Canon 6, Section 6 (temperance, patience, courtesy)
• Rule on Gender-Fair Language
• Rule 140, Sections 10(1) and 11(C) of the Revised Rules of Court (disciplinary offenses and penalties)
Factual Background
Complainants alleged that during hearings in Civil Case No. 99-10985, Judge Rufon used intemperate and obscene language, including a remark to a female litigant about opening her “arms and legs.” Cynthia Bagtas-Serios’s affidavit corroborated humiliating and discriminatory conduct. Respondent countered with stenographic notes and case records, admitting only to “strong and colorful” language when under the influence.
Procedural History
After respondent’s denial, the Supreme Court referred the matter to Justice Rebecca De Guia-Salvador of the Court of Appeals for investigation. A preliminary conference occurred but subsequent hearings were impractical due to travel constraints. Complainant Caldit withdrew her complaint; the case proceeded on pleadings and submitted documents.
Issue
Whether there is sufficient cause to hold Judge Rufon administratively liable for:
- Violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct and Canon 6’s requirement of temperate, patient, and courteous language;
- Use of foul, obscene, or discriminatory language;
- Discrimination against women lawyers and litigants; and
- Unethical conduct.
Findings
The Court affirmed that complainants bore the burden of proving substantial evidence. Despite lack of live hearings, documentary evidence and affidavits demonstrated that respondent uttered vulgar and discriminatory remarks in open court. His partial admission of “frank” language and corroborative affidavit supported a finding of intemperance injurious to the dignity of the judiciary.
Rationale
Under Section 6, Canon 6 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct, judges must “maintain order and decorum” and be “patient, dignified and courteous.” The 1987 Constitution m
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 143313)
Facts of the Case
- On February 11, 2005, Atty. Rowena V. Guanzon, Atty. Pearl R. Montesino (Gender Watch Coalition), Asst. City Prosecutor Rosanna Saril-Toledano and Atty. Erfe del Castillo-Caldit filed a letter-complaint against Judge Anastacio C. Rufon for:
• Violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Rule on Gender-Fair Language
• Use of foul, obscene and discriminatory language
• Discrimination against women lawyers and litigants
• Unethical conduct - Respondent Judge Rufon denied the charges in his January 20, 2006 comment.
- On March 14, 2006, the Court referred the case to Justice Rebecca De Guia-Salvador of the Court of Appeals for investigation, report, and recommendation.
- A preliminary conference was held on July 13, 2006. Only Atty. Guanzon and Judge Rufon appeared; geographic distance made further appearances difficult and costly.
- Parties submitted pre-trial briefs:
• Respondent proposed stipulation of facts.
• Complainant Guanzon enumerated charges, probable witnesses, and documentary evidence. - Complainant Toledano’s affidavit imputed bias and abuse of authority to respondent for granting bail in Criminal Cases Nos. 03-24800 and 03-24801.
- Complainant Caldit withdrew her complaint by letter.
- Due to the parties’ unavailability, Justice Salvador resolved the case on the pleadings and documents.
Issue Presented
- WHETHER OR NOT sufficient cause exists to hold Judge Anastacio C. Rufon administratively liable for:
• Violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Rule on Gender-Fair Language
• Use of foul, obscene or discriminatory language
• Discrimination against women lawy