POLITICAL LAW JURISPRUDENCEATTY. GOROSPE
A.M. No. 93-7-696-0 February 21,1995In Re JOAQUIN T. BORROMEO, ExRel. Cebu City Chapter of theIntegrated Bar of the Philippines.
HELD:Joaquin Borromeo was declared guiltyof constructive contempt of court forrepetitiously disrespecting the decisions andresolutions issued by the courts, and even byissuing a circular containing libelous andoffending accusations (like whimsical,capricious, and tyrannical) against theSupreme Court justices and its employees. Heeven delivered a letter accusing lawyers of defamatory comments and insults. This is dueto his series of dismissed complaints andappeals against 3 banks namely Traders RoyalBank, United Coconut Planters Bank, andSecurity Bank and Trust Co. from which heobtained loans with unfulfilled mortgages. Inrelation to this, he filed cases against thelawyers of these banks and even against theclerks of court who signed the minuteresolutions of these cases. The actions reachedthe alarming number of 50 cases varying fromcivil, criminal, to administrative cases.In response, the court answered all hisfalse alleged accusations through a resolutionalong with declaring him guilty of contempt of court.
A.M. MTJ-98-1147 July 2, 1998 JESUS S. CONDUCTO
JUDGE ILUMINADO C. MONZON
FACTS:A complaint was filed by petitionerConducto with the Sangguniang Panlungsod of San Pablo City against Benjamin Maghirang,the barangay chairman of Barangay III-E of San Pablo City, for abuse of authority, seriousirregularity and violation of law in that, amongother things for appointing his sister-in-law tothe position of barangay secretary whichviolates the law. A case was filed againstMaghirang for violating Art 244 (UnlawfulAppointment) under the RPC. Petitioner seeksthat Maghirang be suspended from his officebut it was denied by the respondent judgeholding that the requirement for such action isa simultaneous existence of administrative andcriminal cases as against the accused, whichaccording to him is not present in this case,and that the reelection of the BarangayChairman is a condonation of his mistakesduring his prior term. Hence, petitioner filed acase against the respondent judge forignorance of the law.ISSUE: WON respondent judge is guilty of ignorance of the law.HELD: YES.The claim of respondent Judge that alocal official who is criminally charged can bepreventively suspended only if there is anadministrative case filed against him is withoutbasis. It is well settled that Section 13 of RA3019 makes it mandatory for theSandiganbayan (or the Court) to suspend anypublic officer against whom a valid informationcharging violation of this law, Book II, Title 7of the RPC, or any offense involving fraud upongovernment or public funds or property is filedin court. Barangay Chairman BenjaminMaghirang was charged with UnlawfulAppointment, punishable under Article 244,Title 7, Book II of the Revised PenalCode. Therefore, it was mandatory on JudgeMonzon’s part, considering the Motion filed, toorder the suspension of Maghirang.Also, In
Ingco v. Sanchez
this Courtexplicitly ruled that the re-election of a publicofficial extinguishes only the administrative,but not the criminal, liability incurred by himduring his previous term of office.Be that as it may, it would also do wellto note that good faith and lack of maliciousintent cannot completely free respondent fromliability.
Digested and compiled by Monica S. Cajucom, UST Law
“It’s not how good you are, it’s how good you want to be.” –Paul Arden