Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
JUDICIAL
CONDUCT
(Preliminaries, Setions 1 & 2)
By:
GROUP 1
ABIAN, Kevin Joire
APASAN, Rae Abby
BOBADILLA, Katrina Isabella
MATEO, Megan Mary
PASINOS, Ira
REYES, John Harold
TAN, Maria Katrina
1A
Submitted To:
Judicial Ethics
Branch of moral science which treats of the right and proper conduct
and behavior to be observed by all judges and magistrates in trying and
deciding controversies brought before them. Such behavior must be
demonstrative of independence, integrity, impartiality, equality, propriety,
competence and diligence.
The relations of judge and lawyer should be founded on mutual respect and
on a deep appreciation by one of the duties of the other (Romero vs. Valle,
147 SCRA 197)
The New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary consists of it
consists of six canons to wit: Independence, integrity, impartiality, propriety,
equality, and competence and diligence.
Illustrative Case:
Marces Sr. Vs. Arcangel
Facts:
An Executive Judge was requested by a party involved in a barangay case to
attend a barangay conciliation proceedings where he introduced himself as
the Executive Judge of the area, which act is an obvious demonstration of
support for said party.
Issue:
Whether or not the judge committed improper conducted.
Held:
The actuations of the judge are improper and censurable. A judge should
refrain from interfering in any manner in the outcome of a litigation before
any court or another administrative agency.
Petitioner Jose Teofilo Mercado writes Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide assailing
the latter of his partiality by alleging htath he pressured the Justice Angelina
Sandoval-Gutierrez, the ponente handling the petitioners case, to favor his
adversary Security Bank Corporation. He alleged that this information was
transmitted to him by his counsel, Atty. Jose P. Villanueva, who he claims is a
close friend of the ponente. Petitioner further alleged that an irregulatiry or
bribery attended the denial of his petition for review by insinuating that the
traels of Atty. Villanueva and the ponente abroad were financed by
respondent bank.
Issue:
Whether or not Atty. Jose P. Villanueva is guilty of contempt of court by
committing a breach of Professional Responsibility due to reasons claimed by
petitioner.
Held:
Yes, Atty. Jose P. Villanueva is guilty of indirect contempt of court. Rule 15.06
of the Code of Professional Responsibility states that A lawyer shall not
state or imply that he is able to influence any public official, tribunal or
legislative body. Further, Rule 15.07 provides that : a lawyer must impress
upon his client compliance with the laws and principles of fairness. Atty.
Villanueva took the forbidden course. In informing Mercado that he was a
very good, close, and long time friend: of the ponente, Atty. Villanueva
impressed upon the former that he can obtain a favourable disposition of his
case. However, when his petition was dismissed twice, Mercados
expectation crumbled. This prompted him to hurl unfounded, malicious, and
disrespectful accusations against Chief Justice Davide and the petitioner.
- They must not fraternize with officials which will tend to create the negative
impression that in the near future there will be some mutual reciprocations
for the accommodations or favors extended to one another. (Pineda, Judicial
Ethics)
Judges must be Fearless and Unafraid to Displease Any Person
-
Even accepting from the nonce, that there was this supposed pressure
from a source twice removed from national official earlier, her confessed
act of succumbing to this pressure on the telephone is a patent betrayal
of the public trust reposed on respondent as an arbiter of the law and a
revelation of her weak moral character. (Ramirez vs Corpus-Macandog,
144 SCRA 462)
Existing balance of power shall not Influence Judges
Illustrative Case:
Facts:
Alfonso vs Alonzo-Legasto
A.M. No. MTJ 94-995. September 5, 2002.|||
under separate appointment papers and received salaries and other benefits
from the city government. On August 16, 1993, respondent Judge wrote to
Mayor Mathay returning all but one of all the 41 members to Quezon City
Government allegedly to utilize maximum potentials and resources of
National and City paid employees and the letter returning based on the
alleged plan to reorganize the OCC-METC; which dated back at the time of
Guillermo Loja. The transfer was, however, formally initiated sometime in
June or July through an assessment undertaken by then Vice Mayor Charito
Planas and on August 17, 1993, Mayor Mathay issued Office Order No. 47
reassigning the forty-three City Government Employees including herein
petitioners to different offices of the Quezon City Government.
Issue: WON Judge Alonzo-Legasto violated Section 5 of the Code of Judicial
Conduct
Held:
Yes. Judge Alonzo Legasto violated the Code of Judicial Conduct which
states that Judges shall not only be free from appropriate connections with
and influence by, the executive and legislative branches of government, but
must also appear to be free therefrom to a reasonable observer.
In this case, Judge Alonzo-Legasto violated the rules and regulations
governing the detail, reassignment or transfer of court employees as she
exceeded her authority under sec. IV of Administrative Order No. 6 which is
limited to the temporary assignments of three months extendible only once
for the same period. Furthermore, it was Judge Legastos duty to apprise the
Office of Court Administrator of the personnel requirements and the alleged
need to streamline the staffing pattern before informing the local
government of its employees and instead refer the matter personally to the
Office of the Vice Mayor Charito Planas for evaluation and assessment.
Judge Legasto cannot hind behind the authorization issued by Mayor
Mathay for the transfer of the 41 court employees to give an impression of
legality to her action. While it is proper to consult the responsible employees
without transgressing the authority of the Office of the administrator, she
undoubtedly had the correlative duty to promote the proper discharge of the
courts mandate to improve the judicial services and facilitate the
dispensation of justice by keeping the court duly informed of the plan to
reduce the courts personnel. Needless to stress, it is absolutely essential to
the proper administration of justice that courts have full control over the
official actions of those through whom the administration of the affairs of the
Does not necessarily mean that the judges should live in retirement or
seclusion or comparably like hermits. They may still commingle with the
society provided that they do not compromise their independence.
They may also join civil, religious and professional organizations as long
as their membership does not interfere with their judicial tasks.
Judicial safeguards
o Judges must always be wary and cautious that outside forces
shall not be permitted to derail or undermine the independence
of the judiciary
o Judges are expected to stand up and defend the integrity of the
courts whenever attacked are hurled without justification
o Judges must be heedful, circumspect and cautious against
sporadic or systematic attempts to undermine the judiciary
o A weak judiciary will give rise to week country
Justices and Judges shall not blindly obey the orders eve the highest
offices of the land.
through his staff, required her to pay the amount of Php 150,000 for him to
render judgment in her favor in the two criminal cases she filed. Respondent
judge, on the other hand, asserts that it was complainant who attempted to
bribe him by offering to pay for the down payment of the car he was
planning to but, and she even sought the intervention of San Juan Mayor
Jinggoy Estrada to persuade him to rule for the complainant.
ISSUE: Whether or not the acts committed by the Respondent violate the
standards of judicial conduct?
HELD: Respondent Judge is suspended for 4 months.
RATIO DECIDENDI:
Court ruled that respondents act of sending one of his staff to
communicate with the complainant and show copies of the draft decisions,
and his act of meeting with his litigants outside his office beyond office hours
are in contravention of the standard of Judicial Conduct. That the version of
the complainant is far more credible since she cannot acquire a copy of the
draft of the decision if it was not given by the courts personnel.
Judges shall adhere to the highest tenets of judicial conduct. They must
be the embodiment of competence, integrity, and independence. Must not
only be pure, but also above suspicion, for the strengthening of public
confidence to their office, of the latter not only being founded in highest
standard of legal knowledge and diligence, but also of high moral integrity by
all means.
ATTY. ARTURO A. ROMERO vs.HON. JUDGE GABRIEL O. VALLE, JR.
A.M. No. R-192-RTJ
January 9, 1987
FACTS:
Complainant is one of the two counsels for plaintiff in Civil Case No.
6821 entitled "Iglesia Filipina Independiente versus Rafael Albano, et. al.," for
"Quieting of Title with Preliminary Injunction," pending before the Regional
Trial Court of Ilocos Norte-Laoag City, branch XII, presided by Respondent
Judge.
During the trial of said case on November 19, 1984, complainant
requested that an inventory book of plaintiff be marked as Exhibit F.
Respondent Judge interrupted the complainant with a remark that the said
inventory book should be marked Exh. G since there is already an Exh. F of
the plaintiff which was marked during the last hearing of the case when
complainant was absent. The fact that there was already an Exh. F for the
plaintiff was confirmed by the manifestation of Atty. Rafael Ruiz, counsel for
the defendant after verifying his notes as requested by respondent judge.
Nevertheless, the complainant in a loud voice insisted that his proposed
marking of the Exhibit is the correct one as the Exhibit F referred to by
respondent judge and Atty. Ruiz was not initialed by the Clerk of Court. This
remark of complainant irritated the respondent judge who retorted that
complainant is not prepared for trial and admonished the latter to be
prepared with his trial brief before coming to court so that he will not bangle
(sic) the marking of his exhibit. As the complainant continued insisting in a
loud voice that his proposed marking of the inventory book as Exhibit F is
correct, despite the fact that respondent judge had admonished him
[complainant] not to bring his "passion" to the court and if complainant does
not respect the Judge, he should respect the court, the respondent banged
his gavel left the rostrum and went to his chamber.
According to the complainant and his witness, [Atty. Andres Tunac, cocounsel of complainant in the case], the respondent, before leaving the
rostrum made this remark to complainant "You step out. We finish the
matter." Respondent denied having made the challenge to complainant and
alleged that what he said or declared before leaving the rostrum was "five
minutes recess." This call for a recess by respondent is confirmed and/or
corroborated by Atty. Rafael Ruiz, defendant's counsel in the case on trial and
respondent's witness in this investigation. From his chamber, respondent
judge went to the stairs passing the corridor holding his coat with his left
hand while on his right hand he was holding a hand gun [revolver] which was
inside its holster. As respondent walked on the corridor towards the stairs, he
looked at the courtroom where the lawyers were. Upon reaching the stairs,
respondent was informed by his clerk that there are still cases in the
calendar ready for trial. Respondent returned to his chamber and placed his
gun inside his table. Later, respondent came out to resume his court session.
At the resumption of the trial, the complainant stood up and asked the
respondent to inhibit himself from hearing the case. The respondent required
the complainant to put his request in writing and dictated an order resetting
the case to another date. The case [Civil Case No. 6821], is now transferred
to another judge who presides over Branch XIII.
Even if both parties are in pari delicto, the respondent judge on his part
exhibited shortness of temper and impatience, contrary to the duties and
restrictions imposed upon him by reason of his office. Respondent judge
appears to have a valid explanation for gun, but such explanation cannot be
taken as carrying a satisfactory. For his having chosen to carry the same in
plain view of the complainant and other lawyers inside the courtroom when
he came out of his chambers on his way to the stairs. Taken in the light of
what had just transpired, the actuation of respondent judge was not an
innocent gesture, but one calculated to instill fear in or intimidate
complainant. We cannot let this pass unnoticed. Respondent judge's behavior
constitutes grave misconduct. It is a serious violation of the Canons of
Judicial Ethics which require that a "judge's official conduct should be free
from the appearance of impropriety, and his personal behavior, not only
upon the bench and in the performance of judicial duties, but also in his
every day life, should be beyond reproach."
Examples of Impropriety:
1. In-chambers sessions without the presence of the other party
and his counsel
2. Judge making the courtroom as a gambling place
3. Judge who practice law
4. Habitual tardiness
5. Slapping of court personnel
6. Non-payment of just debt
A judge must pay a high price for the honor bestowed upon him, for his
private as well as hos official conduct must at all times be free from the
appearance of impropriety
It has been stressed by the Court time and again that members of
the judiciary should display not only the highest integrity but also
must at all times conduct themselves in such manner as to be
beyond reproach and suspicion.
Integrity
Independence
Industry
Intelligence
- That faith will grow or dwindle accordingly as the judges are honest
or corrupt
The endeavor to purify the bench as much as the court is able, that
the misdeeds of a relatively few may not taint the name of all (OCA
vs Judge Hermoso 150 SCRA 278)
Examples:
1. The hitching of a ride by the judge in the car of a party-litigant
in going to and from the place of the ocular inspection. By
riding in the car of the party-litigant, he exposed himself to
suspicion, thus impairing the trust and confidence of the
people in the administration of justice. A judge should be
temperate, patient and impartial, having always in mind that
every litigant is entitled to nothing short of the cold
neutrality of an independent, wholly-free, disinterested and
impartial tribunal
Examples:
1. Referring to a petitioner as reckless and stupid, selfanointed tyrant, and assume the posture of a crocodile
A judge must not lose his cool and avoid using intemperate language.
The wise man is esteemed for his discernment, yet pleasing speech
increases his persuasiveness (Proverbs 16:21) Reminder to both
judges and lawyers
This is corollary to the rule that a judge shall maintain order and
proper decorum in court. He has the power to take or initiate
appropriate actions against lawyers or court personnel under his
supervision for unprofessional conduct brought to or coming to his
attention.
Example:
1. When a criminal is convicted and conviction is made known to
all, it sends a reminder to the people that crime does not pay