2.conducto vs. Monzon PDF
2.conducto vs. Monzon PDF
*
A.M. No. MTJ981147. July 2, 1998.
________________
* FIRST DIVISION.
620
Thus far, no ruling to the contrary has even rippled the doctrine
enunciated in the abovementioned cases. If respondent has truly
been “continuously keeping abreast of legal and jurisprudential
development [sic] in the law,” it was impossible for him to have
missed or misread these cases. What detracts from his claim of
assiduity is the fact that he even cited the cases of Oliveros v.
Villaluz and Aguinaldo v. Santos in support of his 30 June 1995
order. What is then evident is that respondent either did not
thoroughly read these cases or that he simply miscomprehended
them. The latter, of course, would only manifest either
incompetence, since both cases were written in plain and simple
language thereby foreclosing any possibility of misunderstanding
or confusion; or deliberate disregard of a long settled doctrine
pronounced by this Court. While diligence in keeping uptodate
with the decisions of this Court is a commendable virtue of judges
—and, of course, members of the Bar—comprehending the
decisions is a different matter, for it is in that area where one’s
competence may then be put to the test and proven. Thus, it has
been said that a judge is called upon to exhibit more than just a
cursory acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules; it is
imperative that he be conversant with basic legal principles and
aware of wellsettled and authoritative doctrines. He should strive
for excellence, exceeded only by his passion for truth, to the end
that he be the personification of justice and the Rule of Law.
621
RESOLUTION
________________
1 Rollo, 25.
2 Rollo, 8.
3Id., 1112.
623
________________
4Id., 1314.
5Id., 1718.
6Id., 19.
7 Rollo, 20.
624
SEC. 13. Any incumbent public officer against whom any criminal
prosecution under a valid information under this Act or under
Title 7, Book II of the Revised Penal Code or for any offense
involving fraud upon government or public funds or property
whether as a single or as complex offense and in whatever stage
of execution and mode of participation, is pending in Court, shall
be suspended from office.
9
In his Order of 30 June 1995, respondent judge denied the
motion for suspension on the ground that:
________________
8Id., 2627.
9Id., 30.
10 Rollo, 3335.
625
________________
11 Pascual v. Provincial Board of Nueva Ecija, G.R. No. 11959, 31 October 1959;
Lizares v. Hechanova, G.R. No. L22059, 17 May 1966; Oliveros v. Villaluz, G.R.
No. L34636, 30 May 1974; Aguinaldo v. Santos, G.R. No. 94115, 21 August 1992);
Ingco v. Sanchez, 21 SCRA 1292).
12 Id., 3637.
626
________________
13 Rollo, 39.
14 Citing Ramirez v. CorpuzMacandog, 144 SCRA 462, 474475 [1986];
Dela Cruz v. Concepcion, 235 SCRA 597 [1994]; Roa v. Imbing, 231 SCRA
57 [1994].
627
________________
628
628 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED
Conducto vs. Monzon
629
630
________________
631
Then on 20 June 20
1969, in Luciano v. The Provincial
Governor, et al., this Court likewise categorically declared
that criminal liabilities incurred by an elective public
official during his previous term of office were not
extinguished by his reelection, and that Pascual v.
Provincial Governor and Lizares v. Hechanova referred
only to administrative liabilities committed during the
previous term of an elective official, thus:
________________
632
________________
633
634
________________
635
________________
636
________________
637
638
© Copyright 2015 Central Book Supply, Inc. All rights reserved.