Thursday, May 19, 2011

Case Digest: Re: Anonymous Complaint Against Judge Edmundo T. Acuna, Regional Trial Court, Caloocan City, Branch 123

28 July 2005
Ponente: Callejo, Sr., J.


FACTS:

Concerned citizens of the lower court filed an anonymous letter to the Office of the Court Administrator reporting the alleged malpractices of Judge Edmundo Acuna.  Among these are his regular use of expletives and insulting terms such as “putang ina” and “putris,” and his constant berating and embarrassment of people in front of others. It was also reported that he conducted trials and filed decisions for five criminal cases while he was on official leave from the 15th of August to the 15th of September 2001.

The respondent contended that these allegations were exaggerated and the only purpose of which is to harass him, and that part of his odd behaviours that may seem unacceptable to his colleagues were brought about by his mourning due to the loss of his son which was amplified by the poor performance ratings of his staff.  Although he did admit to using such offensive terms, respondent averred that these were not directed to anyone in particular.  He also stated in his defense that while he was issued an Authority to Travel dated 14th of August 2011 to travel to Canada, he still presented evidence on his entries in the daily time records that he was not yet on leave from the 15th to the 21st of August 2011.  He thus had the right and duty to come to court as the case may be.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the respondent’s behaviour and issuance of decisions while on official leave are subject to disciplinary actions.

HELD:

Yes.  The Court held that the use of such expletives is improper for the lauded office of a magistrate of the law.  As the public expects more from such a high and respectable office, the same level of expectation is also placed upon the person who holds it to uphold its respectability and be conscious of his acts in order to maintain its honourability.  A judge is expected to be temperate, patient and courteous in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiability of the judiciary.  As held in Ignacio and Valenzuela, a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities, to which herein respondent is guilty of.

Furthermore, the Court agrees with the Investigating Judge that overzealousness to work is not a shield from administrative liability for the dire consequences that may effect from the result of his decisions and orders issued while he was supposed to be on official leave.

As Judge Acuna was found guilty of impropriety, he is reprimanded and is sternly warned that repetition of the same will be dealt with more severely.




No comments:

Post a Comment