Manila
SECOND DlVISION
A.M. No. 171-MJ January 30, 1976
RESIDENTS OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF QUIRINO ILOCOS SUR, complainants,
vs.
MUNICIPAL JUDGE FELIX MANUEL of Quirino, Ilocos Sur, respondent.
R E S O L U T I O N
FERNANDO, J:
It is a truism that there is an added incentive to good behavior if a judge is ever conscious of the adverse consequences that may result from an administrative complaint for any misstep or misconduct on his part. At the same time, while the right to file charges for an alleged dereliction of duty on the part of a member of the judiciary is embraced in the constitutional right to petition,1 the latter is entitled to protection against unjustified slurs on his reputation, especially so if it can be shown to be motivated by personal spite or ill will. This observation is prompted by what did transpire in his administrative complaint against Judge Felix Manuel of the Municipality of Quirino, Ilocos Sur.
In a report submitted by the then Judicial Consultant Manuel P. Barcelona, the charges as well as the specific offenses imputed to respondent Judge were set forth as follows: "In an unverified petition signed by some sixty-four residents of the different sitios and municipal, of Quirino, province of Ilocos Sur, respondent Felix Manuel, municipal judge of Quirino, was announced for the following: 'That he frequently disturbs the coplainants in their barrio hall (Abong) by uttering insulting and challenging words to the public; that in many instances respondent challenged barrio officials and barrio leaders; that he came to barrio Lagpat bringing with him a caliber 22 rifle saying, 'I am ready to kill that he frequently roams the streets of the poblacion under the influence of liquor; and that the people in general have lost their confidence and honor due to the respondent as a municipal judge.ℒαwρhi৷'2 The matter was then referred for investigation by Judge Jack Soriano of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, Second Judicial District, Branch IV. He submitted his report recommending the dismissal of the charges against respondent Judge in view of the lack of evidence to substantiate them. Moreover, as to one of the only four residents of that place who showed interest in the matter, a person named Felix Padao it was shown that he had entertained a long grudge against respondent. The report of Judge Soriano was then submitted for the appraisal of the Judicial Consultant, who was in agreement. As he pointed out: "Considering the facts, that of the 64 original signatories in the said petition only four appeared and testified despite the notices sent to all of them before every hearing; that the declaration of said four witnesses which were contradictory in some respects, failed to substantiate the charges, the admission of the principal witness that he had a long-standing grudge against respondent, the manifestation of the counsel for complainants that their complaint be dismissed; the affidavits of expression of continued trust and confidence in respondent, signed by hundreds of residents of the sitios and municipality of Quirino, province of Ilocos Sur, and the desirabilty and normality of possessing a firearm in a far-flung barrion in Ilocos Sur, before the advent of martial law, I find the recommendation of District Judge Jack Soriano, of the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur, Branch IV, well taken.3
A reading of the record persuades us of the correctness of such appraisal. Its recommendation should be accpeted. Nor is this all. It would be a gross disservice to judicial independence if, after an investigation duly had, and in the absence of any showing of guilt by respondent Judge, no mention is made of the disapproval that this Court visits on the harrassment to which a member of the bench is subjected from a party who, for one reason or another, may entewrtain a grudge against him.
WHEREFORE, the charges against respondent Judge Felix Manuel are dismissed for lack of merit. Let a copy of this resolution be entered on his record.
Barredo, Antonio, Aquino and Concepcion, Jr., JJ., concur.
Footnotes
1 According to Article IV, Section 9 of the Constitution: "No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for redress of grievances."
2 Memorandum for Chief Justice Querube C. Makalintal, November 28, 1975.
3 Memorandum for Chief Justice Querube C. Makalintal, November 28, 1975.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
