CASE DIGEST
(LEGAL ETHICS)
EN BANC
[ A.M. Nos. R-278-RTJ & R-309-RTJ, May 30,
1986 ]
ATTY. ENRICO M. CABRERA, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE
JAMES B. PAJARES, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, NAGA CITY, RESPONDENT.
FACTS:
Complainant was the defendant in a Civil Case which respondent Judge was trying.
According to the complainant, he was advised by his counsel to accommodate any
request for money from the respondent so that he would not be unduly hard on
the complainant. Sometime, respondent Judge intimated to the complainant that
he needed money. Following his counsel’s advice, complainant expressed
willingness to help the judge financially and the day after, he gave P1000.00
to the respondent Judge. However, two months thereafter, the respondent Judge
again told him that he needed money. It was then that he decided to denounce
the judge to the authorities. Complainant asked for the assistance of the NBI
in entrapping Judge Pajares.
In view of the success of the entrapment,
complainant now comes to Court and charged the respondent Judge with indirect
bribery. Respondent claimed that he took the marked money enclosed in an
envelope because he thought that it was for the surveyor who had been appointed
to prepare a survey plan of the land in dispute under a Civil Case.
Nevertheless, the claim of the respondent was
countered by the prior filing by the complainant of a motion for
reconsideration of the judge’s order appointing a surveyor, which the latter
informed the judge during the entrapment, but prior to the arrival of the NBI.
Upon investigation by the Intermediate Appellate Court Justice Vicente Mendoza,
he found respondent Judge guilty of indirect bribery and recommended a suspension from
office of 2 years and 4 months, taking into consideration the penalty
prescribed in Article 211 of the RPC, which is a penalty of imprisonment with
the same duration of 2 years and 4 months.
ISSUE:
Whether
or not the penalty of suspension for the commission of indirect bribery by a
judge is proper.
HELD: NO.
The
Court has time and again stressed that members of the judiciary should display
not only the highest integrity but must at all times conduct themselves in such
manner as to be beyond reproach and suspicion. The Court had likewise
stressed that "the judge is the visible representation of the law and,
more importantly, of justice. From him, the people draw their will and
awareness to obey the law. They see in him an intermediary of justice
between two conflicting interests, x x x. Thus, for the judge to return
that regard, he must be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for
the others to follow. He should be studiously careful to avoid even the
slightest infraction of the law."
The penalty of 2 years and 4 months imprisonment
provided for the criminal offense of indirect bribery may not be equated with
the penalty of separation from the judicial service which is the proper
applicable administrative penalty by virtue of respondent Judge's serious
misconduct prejudicial to the judiciary and the public interest.
ACCORDINGLY, respondent Judge is hereby dismissed
from the service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and pay and with
prejudice to reinstatement in any branch of the government or any of its
agencies or instrumentalities. The Clerk of Court is hereby ordered to
return the ten P100.00 bills (Exhibits D-1 to D-10) to the complainant Atty.
Enrico M. Cabrera. This decision is immediately executory
Comments
Post a Comment