RULE

140
Charges Against Judges of First Instance

Section 1. Complaint - All Charges against judges of first instance shall be in writing and shall set
out distinctly, clearly, and concisely the facts complained of as constituting the alleged serious
misconduct or inefficiency of the respondent, and shall be sworn to and supported by affidavits
of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts therein alleged, and shall be accompanied
with copies of documents which may substantiate said facts.

Section 2. Service or dismissal. - If the charges appear to merit action, a copy thereof shall be
served upon the respondent, requiring him to answer within ten (10) days from the date service.
If the charges do not merit action, or if the answer shows to the satisfaction of the court that the
charges are not meritorious, the same shall be dismissed.

Section 3. Answer; hearing. - Upon the filing of respondents answer or upon the expiration of the
time for its filing, the court shall assign one of its members, a Justice of the Court of Appeals or a
judge of first instance to conduct the hearing of the charges. The Justice or judge so assigned
shall set a day for the hearing, and notice thereof shall be served on both parties. At such hearing
the parties may present oral or written evidence.

Section 4. Report - After the hearing, the Justice or judge shall file with the Supreme Court a
report of his findings of fact and conclusions of law, accompanied by the evidence presented by
the parties and the other papers in he case.

Section 5. Action - After the filing of the report, the court will take such action as the facts and
the law may warrant.

Section 6. Confidential. - Proceedings against judges of first instance shall be private and
confidential.

[A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC September 17, 2002]
RE:AUTOMATIC CONVERSION OF SOME ADMINISTRATIVE CASES AGAINST JUSTICES OF THE
CA & THE SANDIGANBAYAN, et al.

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 17 SEPT 2002.

A.M. No. 02-9-02-SC(Re: Automatic Conversion of Some Administrative Cases Against Justices of
the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan; Judges of Regular and Special Courts; and Court
Officials Who are Lawyers as Disciplinary Proceedings Against Them Both as Such Officials and as
Members of the Philippine Bar.)

Some administrative cases against Justices of the Court of Appeals and the Sandiganbayan;
judges of regular and special courts; and court officials who are lawyers are based on grounds
which are likewise grounds for the disciplinary action of members of the Bar for violation of the
Lawyer's Oath, the Code of Professional Responsibility, and the Canons of Professional Ethics, or
for such other forms of breaches of conduct that have been traditionally recognized as grounds
for the discipline of lawyers.

In any of the foregoing instances, the administrative case shall also be considered a disciplinary
action against the respondent Justice, judge or court official concerned as a member of the Bar.
The respondent may forthwith be required to comment on the complaint and show cause why
he should not also be suspended, disbarred or otherwise disciplinarily sanctioned as a member
of the Bar. Judgment in both respects may be incorporated in one decision or resolution.

This Resolution shall supplement Rule 140 of the Rules of Court and shall take effect on the first
day of October 2002. It shall apply to administrative cases already filed where the respondents
have not yet been required to comment on the complaints.

This Resolution shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the Philippines.