Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Philippines, Inc." When in Fact The Case Was Still With Mondala
Philippines, Inc." When in Fact The Case Was Still With Mondala
submission of the said report and when the draft decision was
1. MONDALA v. JUDGE MARIANO being printed in final form, the computer bogged down and the
draft decision could no longer be retrieved. 4
EN BANC
Belando alleged that she is the permanent employee of the
[A.M. No. RTJ-06-2010. January 25, 2007.] local government of Makati City detailed to Branch 136; and
that she re-typed the final draft of the Amanetcase in the early
MARISSA R. MONDALA, Legal Researcher, Regional Trial
part of 2005 upon Mondala's instructions. 5
Court, Branch 136, Makati City, complainant, vs. JUDGE
REBECCA R. MARIANO, Regional Trial Court, Branch 136, Atty. Diaz claimed that the Amanet case was one of the cases
Makati City, respondent. turned over to him by Mondala on August 13, 2005; that
the Amanet case had been with Mondala for research since
DECISION
February 2005 while the latter served as Officer-in-Charge of
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J p: Branch 136; that the case remained pending up to the time
Mondala turned over the same to him on August 13, 2005. 6
This is an administrative matter concerning the letter-complaint
of Marissa R. Mondala, Legal Researcher of the Regional Trial Judge Mariano averred that Mondala should have called her
Court of Makati City, Branch 136, against Presiding Judge attention regarding the status of the subject case to enable her
Rebecca R. Mariano of the same court. 1 to address the situation; that Mondala's failure to inform her of
the status of the case showed her inefficiency and
In her letter, Mondala charged respondent judge with unworthiness as a public servant.
misrepresenting in her "Report of Pending Cases for January
2005" that she had already decided Civil Case No. 00-564 Judge Mariano insisted that the "quarrel" between her and
entitled "Amanet Inc. v. Eastern Telecommunications Mondala which transpired on August 22, 2005 prompted the
Philippines, Inc." when in fact the case was still with Mondala latter to write the letter-complaint; that Mondala is a perennial
for research and drafting of the decision. latecomer, a habitual absentee, and negligent in the
performance of her duties; that Mondala's disrespectful attitude
In her Comment, Judge Mariano denied Mondala's allegations and unprofessional conduct during the August 22, 2005
and insisted that at the time she prepared the monthly report, a encounter prompted her to ask for Mondala's detail to the
decision had actually been prepared in the Amanet case and it Office of the Clerk of Court of the Makati RTC. CacHES
was mere "oversight" on her part, not misrepresentation, when
she reported the status of the subject case as decided. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), through Deputy
Notwithstanding this, Judge Mariano subsequently prepared Court Administrator Zenaida N. Elepaño and Assistant Court
and signed "another decision" on the same case. 2 Administrator Antonio H. Dujua, made the following
recommendations, the dispositive portion of which states:
To support her allegations, Judge Mariano attached a
certification dated October 25, 2005 issued by Atty. Teodorico 1. That the instant case be converted into a regular
L. Diaz, present Branch 136 Clerk of Court, as well as the administrative matter and that Judge Rebecca R. Mariano be
affidavits executed by Prosecutor Teodoro Rey S. Riel, Jr., found liable for misrepresenting that she decided Civil
former Branch 136 Clerk of Court; Elvira L. Tablate, Clerk-in- Case No. 00-564 entitled " Amanet Inc. vs. Eastern
Charge of Civil Cases; and Ma. Theresa M. Belando, a Clerk Telecommunications Philippines, Inc." sometime in January
detailed to Branch 136. 3 2005 when such case had yet to be printed, signed by her, and
filed with the Clerk of Court as of March 7, 2005, such
In his affidavit, Atty. Riel claimed that he was the Clerk of Court misrepresentation partaking the nature of dishonesty, and be
of Branch 136 from April 1999 up to January 2005; that fined in the amount of P20,000.00;
the Amanet case was among those reported as decided for the
month of January 2005; that when the January 2005 report 2. That Judge Mariano be directed to explain in writing within
was being prepared, he was informed by the Clerk-in-Charge ten (10) days from notice why she should not be disciplined for
for Civil Cases that a decision had already been prepared and her failure to decide the following cases within the 90-day
was due for printing in final form; that Judge Mariano instructed reglementary period without any request for extension of time
him "to include the said case in the list of cases decided for the being filed by her, to wit:
month and to submit a copy of the decision later on since it
Case No. Title Date Date Due Status as
was still to be printed in final form."
Submitted of Dec.
For 2004
Tablate, Clerk-in-Charge for Civil Cases, stated in her affidavit
Decision
that when the January 2005 report was being prepared, the
decision in the Amanet case had already been drafted and was
CIVIL CASES
due for printing in final form; that upon the instruction of Judge
Mariano, Amanet was included in the list of cases decided for 1. 96-1626 Philam Insurance Co. June 29, Sept. 29, Pending
the month without attaching a copy thereof and with the v. Marathon, Inc. 2004 2004 Resolution
2. 91-980 Estate of Zulueta v. June 30, Sept. 30, - do - Mariano on August 22, 2005, this does not deny the fact that
Augusto Camara 2004 2004 Judge Mariano included an undecided case in the list of
decided cases in the January 2005 monthly report.
3. 02-546 BPI v. Milwaukee June 30, Sept. 30, - do -
Builders, Inc. 2004 2004 There is no merit in Judge Mariano's claim that
the Amanet case was included in the list of decided cases
4. 93-4083 Phil. Charter Ins. v. June 28, Sept. 28, - do - because at the time of the preparation of the report, a decision
Swissair 2004 2004 had already been prepared and was due for printing in final
form.
5. 98-460 Export Industry v. June 28, Sept. 28, - do -
Sps. Sy 2004 2004 A decision in a civil case is rendered only upon the signing by
the judge who penned the same and upon filing with the clerk
6. 01-754 Philam v. Geologistic June 25, Sept. 25, - do - of court. A judgment or final order determining the merits of the
2004 2004 case shall be in writing personally and directly prepared by the
judge, stating clearly and distinctly the facts and the law on
7. 00-564 Amanet v. Eastern June 18, Sept. 18, - do -
which it is based, signed by him, and filed with the clerk of
2004 2004
court. 8 What constitutes rendition of judgment is not the mere
8. 01-810 Jasper Ong v. HBI August 27, Nov. 27, - do - pronouncement of the judgment in open court but the filing of
Securities 2004 2004 the decision signed by the judge with the Clerk of Court. 9
9. M-5893 In Re: Guardianship of Sept. 20, Dec. 20, - do - It is elementary that a draft of a decision does not operate as
Minors Manguale 2004 2004 judgment on a case until the same is duly signed and delivered
to the clerk for filing and promulgation. 10Hence, rendition of
CRIMINAL CASES judgment is not effected and completed until after the decision
and judgment signed by the trial judge.
1. 01-2653 PP v. Simon Shamie, June 25, Sept. 25, - do -
et al. 2004 2004 In Echaus v. Court of Appeals, 11 we held:
2. 01-2299 PP v. Lemuel Patungalan June 25, Sept. 25, - do - Time honored and of constant observance is the principle
2004 2004 that no judgment, or order whether final or interlocutory,
has juridical existence until and unless it is set down in
3. 02-2787 PP v. Reynaldo Almerie June 23, Sept. 23, - do - writing, signed, and promulgated, i.e., delivered by the
2004 2004 Judge to the Clerk of Court for filing, release to the parties
and implementation, and that indeed, even after
4. 03-049 PP v. Wilma Cabe June 18, Sept. 18, - do - promulgation, it does not bind the parties until and unless
2004 2004 notice thereof is duly served on them by any of the modes
prescribed by law. . . . 12 (Emphasis supplied)
5. 02-1505 PP v. Alfredo Japon June 7, Sept. 7, - do -
2004 2004 The fact that Judge Mariano had not yet decided
the Amanet case in January 2005, is likewise pointed out in the
and affidavit of Tablate, Clerk-in-Charge for Civil Cases. The
records, on the other hand, show that Judge Mariano
3. That the Office of the Court Administrator be authorized to
submitted the January 2005 monthly report only on March 7,
constitute a team to conduct a judicial audit of Branch 136-
2005, 13 which means that it was only then when RTC-Branch
RTC, Makati City, to enable the said Office to determine the
136 initiated the printing of the decision in the Amanet case. 14
true state of this court's docket. 7
As correctly pointed out by the OCA, what the monthly report
The issues in the instant case are: whether Judge Mariano is
requires is a list of cases decided during the month covered
liable for misrepresentation when she included in the January
and not a list of cases with prepared drafts. Moreover, the list
2005 monthly report the case of " Amanet Inc. v. Eastern
of decided cases should pertain to those decided during the
Telecommunications Philippines, Inc." as among the decided
month for which the report is being submitted, the basis of
cases; and whether respondent judge made inaccurate entries
which is the seventh paragraph of Administrative Circular No.
in the monthly reports and failed to decide the other cases
4-2004. 15
within the 90-day reglementary period.
WHEREFORE, respondent Judge Rebecca R. Mariano of the The Supreme Court affirmed the recommendation of the Office
Regional Trial Court of Makati City, Branch 136, is found guilty of the Court Administrator. According to the Court, by losing his
cool and uttering intemperate language at the policemen on all those who don the judicial robe: that of being a "cerebral
duty regarding the release of detention prisoner Braza, man who deliberately holds in check the tug and pull of purely
respondent judge has overstepped the norm demanded of a personal preferences and prejudices which he shares with the
member of the bench. The Canons of Judicial Ethics mandates rest of his fellow mortals." While it may be true, as complainant
that a judge should so behave at all times as to promote public claims, that he meant no malice nor was he moved by evil
confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. intent, the absence of malice or purity of motive is not a license
When he took personal action in ensuring the temporary for him to resort to inflammatory words to articulate his
release of detention prisoner Braza even in the unholy hours, grievances. Complainant should bear in mind that he and, for
he has cast his integrity in a serious doubt. Although that matter, all judges, should always observe courtesy and
respondent judge may attribute his intemperate language to civility. He should be temperate, patient and courteous both in
human frailty, his noble position in the bench nevertheless conduct and in language.
demands from him courteous speech in and out of the court
because the observance of the Canon of Judicial Ethics does 3. ID.; ID.; A JUDGE'S BEHAVIOR, OFFICIAL OR
not end at the close of office hours nor is limited within the OTHERWISE, SHOULD BE FREE FROM THE APPEARANCE
performance of his official duties. The Court modified the fine OF IMPROPRIETY IN ALL ACTIVITIES AND SHOULD BE
imposed to P5,000.00, instead of P1,000.00. BEYOND REPROACH. — The observance of the Canon of
Judicial Ethics does not end at the close of office hours nor is
SYLLABUS limited within the performance of his official duties. The Canon
of Judicial Ethics commands that a judge's behavior, official or
1. JUDICIAL ETHICS; JUDGES; RESPONDENT JUDGE'S otherwise, should be free from the appearance of impropriety
ACT OF TAKING PERSONAL ACTION IN ENSURING THE in all activities and should be beyond reproach. For a judge's
TEMPORARY RELEASE OF A DETENTION PRISONER official life can not simply be detached from his personal life.
EVEN IN THE UNHOLY HOURS OF THE NIGHT HAS CAST We do not, however, call on judges to live "Saintly" lives when
A SERIOUS DOUBT ON HIS INTEGRITY; CASE AT BAR. — they don their judicial robes, for the "Saintly" lives exhibited by
A judge, as an advocate of justice and visible representation of men of old are not the sole parameter of the conduct of a
the law, must not only apply the law but must imbibe it in his magistrate. In commanding respect for the law, we stated
everyday living. Having accepted the exalted position of a in Cynthia Resngit-Marquez, et al. v. Judge Victor T. Llamas,
judge, both his personal and public life have been set apart Jr., "a magistrate has to live by the example of his precepts. He
from the average citizen. A judge's assumption of office is cannot judge the conduct of others when his own needs
viewed with utmost respect and reverence compatible with his judgment. It should not be 'do as I say and not what I do.' For
position as dispenser of justice. From him the people draw then the court over which he is called to preside will be a
their will and awareness to obey the law. He must be the first mockery, one devoid of respect.
to abide by the law and weave an example for others to follow.
The people's confidence in the judicial system, however, is DECISION
founded not only on the competence and diligence of the
members of the bench, but also on their integrity and moral YNARES-SANTIAGO, J p:
uprightness. The public will have faith in the administration of
justice only if they believe that the occupants of the bench An Affidavit-Complaint 1 was filed by P/SInsp. Omega Jireh
cannot be accused of arbitrariness in the exercise of their D. Fidel, Chief of Police of Candelaria, Quezon, charging
powers both in and out of the court. Accordingly, he must at all Judge Felix A. Caraos of the Municipal Trial Court of
times avoid even the slightest infraction of the law. By losing Candelaria, Quezon with Grave Abuse of Authority, Grave
his cool and uttering intemperate language at the policemen on Misconduct and Conduct Unbecoming of a Judge.
duty regarding the release of detention prisoner Braza,
Complainant avers that at 10:45 in the evening of February 29,
respondent judge has overstepped the norm demanded of a
1996, respondent judge, who was heavily drunk, went to the
member of the bench. The Canons of Judicial Ethics mandates
Municipal Police Station of Candelaria and attempted to
that a judge should so behave at all times as to promote public
forcibly release one Natividad Braza from detention without
confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
any preliminary investigation or written order for the latter's
When he took personal action in ensuring the temporary
release. Natividad Braza was charged before the MTC of
release of detention prisoner Braza even in the unholy hours,
Candelaria, Quezon with violation of Article 151 of the Revised
he has cast his integrity in a serious doubt. CHcTIA
Penal Code, in Criminal Case No. 4878. While at the police
2. ID.; ID.; JUDGES ARE DEMANDED TO BE ALWAYS station, respondent judge shouted invectives at the policemen
TEMPERATE, PATIENT AND COURTEOUS BOTH IN on duty, "PUTANG INA NINYONG MGA PULIS KAYO,
CONDUCT AND LANGUAGE. — Although, respondent judge NASAAN SI HEPE? HOY, ILABAS NINYO ITO NGAYON DIN,
may attribute his intemperate language to human frailty, his PUTANG INA NINYONG MGA PULIS. SINONG
noble position in the bench nevertheless demands from him MASUSUNOD DITO, MAYOR, PULIS, O JUDGE?"
courteous speech in and out of the court. Judges are
To support the allegation, complainant submitted the joint-
demanded to be always temperate, patient and courteous both
affidavit 2 of the policemen on duty and the affidavits of two
in conduct and in language. In Judge Antonio J. Fineza v.
detention prisoners who witnessed the incident.
Romeo P. Aruelo, we said: As a member of the bench he
should have adhered to that standard of behavior expected of
In his Comment, 3 respondent judge narrated that on February ina" connotes that he did not intend to curse any particular
29, 1996, at 5:30 in the afternoon, while he was watching his policemen at the scene. Judge Rosales thus recommends that
friends play lawn tennis at Tiaong, Quezon, a group of seven respondent judge should only be reprimanded with the stern
market vendors approached him. The market vendors pleaded warning that a repetition of the same act would be dealt with
with him to order the temporary release of a certain Natividad more severely. 5
Braza, also a market vendor.
On August 18, 1997, this case was referred to the Office of the
Respondent judge averred that after reading the complaint Court Administrator (OCA) for evaluation, report and
against Braza and finding that the case was covered by recommendation. The OCA found that the actions committed
the Rule on Summary Procedure, he acceded to their plea. He by respondent judge fell beyond the norms expected of
tried to get in touch with the Chief of Police of Candelaria, members of the bench, and recommended that respondent
Quezon by telephone but to no avail. He then tried to contact judge be meted a fine of P1,000.00 and sternly warned that a
the Candelaria Public Market Police Detachment and was able repetition of the same shall be dealt with more severely.
to talk to a certain Police Officer Limbo. Respondent judge
asked Officer Limbo to convey his message to the municipal We agree with the recommendation of the OCA.
jail warden for the temporary release of Braza pending the
preliminary examination of the latter's case scheduled the A judge, as an advocate of justice and visible representation of
following day. the law, must not only apply the law but must imbibe it in his
everyday living. Having accepted the exalted position of a
Respondent judge further narrated that at around 10:00 that judge, both his personal and public life have been set apart
evening, his wife woke him up and told him that there were two from the average citizen. A judge's assumption of office is
men outside their house. Seeing that they were among the viewed with utmost respect and reverence compatible with his
vendors who approached him earlier at the tennis court, he let position as dispenser of justice. From him the people draw
them in. The two men complained that Braza was not allowed their will and awareness to obey the law. He must be the first
to be released and that the jailer told them, "walang puedeng to abide by the law and weave an example for others to
magpalabas nito kundi si Mayor." follow. 6 The people's confidence in the judicial system,
however, is founded not only on the competence and diligence
Respondent judge disclosed that after he failed to get in touch of the members of the bench, but also on their integrity and
with the Candelaria Chief of Police through telephone, he moral uprightness. 7 The public will have faith in the
decided to proceed to the police station in Candelaria, Quezon administration of justice only if they believe that the occupants
that same evening. When he arrived there, he noticed that a of the bench cannot be accused of arbitrariness in the exercise
telephone was located beside the policemen who were then of their powers both in and out of the court. Accordingly, he
busy watching television and who did not even pay attention to must at all times avoid even the slightest infraction of the law.
him. Respondent judge admitted that this irritated him,
considering that earlier the policemen failed to answer his By losing his cool and uttering intemperate language at the
telephone call, so he uttered the words: "Bakit hindi ninyo policemen on duty regarding the release of detention prisoner
sinasagot ang telepono? Putangina! Kailangan pa ba nating Braza, respondent judge has overstepped the norm demanded
dagdagan yan? O alisin na dahil walang silbi, putangina! of a member of the bench. The Canons of Judicial Ethics
Paano na kung may emergency? O sunog? Nasaan na si mandates that a judge should so behave at all times as to
Hepe?" When he was told that the Chief of Police was out, he promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the
again asked: "Bakit ayaw ninyong palabasin si Braza? At bakit judiciary. 8 When he took personal action in ensuring the
wala daw puwedeng magpalabas sa kanya?" Eventually, temporary release of detention prisoner Braza even in the
respondent judge was able to facilitate the release of detention unholy hours, he has cast his integrity in a serious doubt.
prisoner Braza.
As the OCA aptly observed:
Sec. 2. The behavior and conduct of judges must reaffirm the This is not the first time that respondent Judge Asdala has
people's faith in the integrity of the judiciary. Justice must not been disciplined and penalized by this Court. She has been
merely be done but must also be seen to be done. found guilty of various administrative complaints in at least four
(4) other occasions. 20 In 1999, in Dumlao, Jr. v.
As early as June 6, 2003, OCA Circular No. 70-2003 has Asdala, 21 respondent Judge Asdala was admonished for
directed judges as follows: partiality. A year later, in Bowman v. Asdala, 22she was fined
P2,000.00 for grave abuse of discretion in nine (9) cases when
In view of the increasing number of reports reaching the Office she deliberately withheld and did not attach a copy of her order
of the Court Administrator that judges have been meeting with of inhibition which resulted in the non-transmittal of the records
party litigants inside their chambers, judges are hereby of the criminal cases. In 2005, in Manansala III v.
cautioned to avoid in-chambers sessions without the other Asdala, 23 she was likewise ordered to pay a fine of
party and his counsel present, and to observe prudence at P40,000.00, the highest fine that may be imposed for serious
all times in their conduct to the end that they only act offenses committed by judges and justices, 24 for gross
impartially and with propriety but are also perceived to be misconduct after she interfered with a case of a German
impartial and proper. 14 national who was then detained at the police station awaiting
inquest investigation. In the said case, respondent Judge
Impartiality is essential to the proper discharge of the judicial
Asdala requested the German national's release from custody
office. It applies not only to "the decision itself but also to the
and asked for the amicable settlement of the case against the
process by which the decision is made." 15 As such, judges
latter. Compounding her transgressions, respondent Judge
Asdala likewise ordered her court's sheriff to engage the IN VIEW WHEREOF, judgment is hereby rendered:
assistance of policemen in order to retrieve the German
national's car so that it may be turned over to her custody. Just 1. Respondent Judge Fatima G. Asdala is found GUILTY of
last year, in 2006, in Request of Judge Fatima Gonzales- gross insubordination and gross misconduct unbefitting a
Asdala, RTC-Branch 87, Quezon City, for Extension of the member of the judiciary and is accordingly DISMISSED from
Period to Decide Civil Case No. Q-02-46950 & 14 the service with forfeiture of all salaries, benefits and leave
Others, 25 this Court once again imposed a fine of P11,000.00 credits to which she may be entitled.
on respondent judge for her repeated and unjustifiable failure
to render decisions within the prescribed period. Each penalty 2. Respondent Myrla Nicandro is found GUILTY of
imposed on her in the said cases came with a stern warning insubordination in assuming the position and discharging the
that the subsequent commission of the same or similar offense functions of OIC/Branch Clerk of Court without and in defiance
shall be dealt with more severely. Respondent Judge Asdala of proper authority and is accordingly SUSPENDED from the
has time and time again blatantly disregarded this stream of service for a period of sixty (60) days, without pay,
warnings. Such repeated infractions and heedless commencing on the day immediately following her receipt of a
transgressions can no longer be countenanced by this Court. copy of this Decision, with a warning that a repetition of the
As we have repeatedly stressed, "there is no place in the same or similar acts shall be dealt with more severely. The
judiciary for those who cannot meet the exacting standards of period of suspension shall not be chargeable against her leave
judicial conduct and integrity." 26 credits. Respondent Nicandro is likewise ordered to
immediately cease and desist from discharging the functions of
Be that as it may, the accusation that respondent Judge OIC/Branch Clerk of Court and from representing herself as
Asdala instigated the complainant to file a complaint against such.
Atty. Alejandria must be dismissed for lack of sufficient
evidence. Similarly, we agree with the Investigating Justice that Respondent Nicandro is likewise REPRIMANDED for conduct
the dismissal of the civil case for support cannot be a ground prejudicial to the best interest of the service and ordered to
for administrative complaint as the matter is on appeal with the abstain from transacting with party litigants other than for
CA and appeal is the appropriate remedy of the aggrieved official purposes. ADcSHC
party.
SO ORDERED.
Respondent Nicandro, on her part, has been accused of
Puno, C.J., Quisumbing, Ynares-Santiago, Sandoval-
usurping the functions of OIC. While she acted on the strength
Gutierrez, Carpio, Austria-Martinez, Corona, Carpio-Morales,
of the memorandum of respondent Judge Asdala designating
Azcuna, Tinga, Chico-Nazario, Garcia, Velasco,
her as such, it is undeniable that she is aware of the
Jr. andNachura, JJ., concur.
memorandum of this Court, through the OCA, approving Amy
Soneja's designation as OIC/Branch Clerk of Court. ||| (Edaño v. Asdala, A.M. No. RTJ-06-1974, [July 26, 2007],
Respondent Nicandro's continued exercise of the functions of 555 PHIL 195-206)
OIC after the disapproval of her designation is a clear defiance
of the instruction of this Court.