July 20, 2004
FACTS
After being refused to extend his stay in the Paler Building, respondent Judge Ramon Velasco sent letters to the tenants of the said building, introduced himself as the administrator, and told them that they pay their monthly rentals to him.
Judge Velasco also sent a strongly worded and intimidating letter to Peggy Louise D’Arcy, the administrator of the Paler Building and the person who refused his stay.
D’Arcy was also the wife of Judge Velasco’s deceased Uncle, Abraham Paler.
In all the letters he sent to the tenants and to D’Arcy, Judge Velasco used the letterhead of his Office “Municipal Trial Court of Maasin, Southern Leyte.”
Thereafter, he personally filed criminal complaints against complainant Jordan Oktubre, the attorney-in-fact of D’Arce, for Robbery and Malicious Mischief.
These were supported only by Judge Velasco’s own affidavits and were also lodged in his own sala.
A subpoena, Warrant of Arrest and, Commitment Order, all signed by him, were then issued against Oktubre, resulting in the arrest and detention of Oktubre.
When Judge Velasco issued the Warrant of Arrest, there was no preliminary investigation.
Thus, Oktubre filed a complaint against Judge Velasco for Grave Misconduct, Abuse of Authority, Oppression, and Gross Ignorance of the Law.
Oktubre believed Judge Velasco should be disciplined for using the letterhead of his (Judge Velasco) sala, his failure to inhibit himself from his own criminal complaints, and for his issuance of the warrant of arrest without a preliminary investigation.
On the other hand, Judge Velasco said he was only protecting the interest of his maternal co-heirs in the Paler Building, vindicating his name, honor, reputation, and acting in good faith based on pertinent jurisprudence.
ISSUE
Whether or not Judge Velasco committed grave misconduct, gross ignorance of the law, and grave abuse of authority.
RULING
YES, Judge Velasco committed grave misconduct, gross ignorance of the law, and grave abuse of authority.
A judge shall not allow family, social, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. The prestige of judicial office shall not be used or lent to advance the private interests of others, nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge.
(Rule 2.03, Canon 2, Code of Judicial Conduct)
A judge should take no part in a proceeding where the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(Rule 3.12, Canon 3, Code of Judicial Conduct)
The idea that a judge can preside over his own case is anathema to the notion of impartiality.
A judge who issues a warrant of arrest without first complying with a preliminary investigation is liable for gross ignorance of the law.
DISPOSITIVE PORTION
WHEREFORE, we find respondent Ramon P. Velasco, Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court, Maasin City, Southern Leyte, GUILTY of Grave Misconduct, Gross Ignorance of the Law, and Grave Abuse of Authority for violation of Rule 2.03 and Rule 3.12 of the Code of Judicial Conduct. He is DISMISSED from the service with forfeiture of retirement benefits and with prejudice to reinstatement in any branch of the government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities, including government owned or controlled corporations. However, he shall receive any accrued leaves due him as of this date.
SO ORDERED.
Full text of this decision.
