November 2007 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions > Year 2007 > November 2007 Resolutions >
[A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 06-2533-RTJ : November 14, 2007] FERDINAND A. CRUZ V. JUDGE PEDRO B. CORALES :
[A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 06-2533-RTJ : November 14, 2007]
FERDINAND A. CRUZ V. JUDGE PEDRO B. CORALES
Sirs/Mesdames:
Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated 14 November 2007:
A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 06-2533-RTJ (Ferdinand A. Cruz v. Judge Pedro B. Corales)
On August 22, 2007, a Resolution was issued by this Court denying with finality the Motion for Reconsideration filed by complainant Ferdinand A. Cruz, directing that no further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case, and considering this case closed and terminated. The Motion for Reconsideration stemmed from the February 5, 2007 Resolution of the Court which resolved to:
After a scrutiny of the submissions of the parties, the Court concludes that the complaint against Judge Pedro B. Corales is bereft of merit. In resolving the complaint, we find merit in the report and evaluation of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) that complainant has registered numerous unfounded administrative complaints against judges and several prosecutors that have prejudiced the orderly administration of justice, thus:
SO OREDERED.
A.M. OCA I.P.I. No. 06-2533-RTJ (Ferdinand A. Cruz v. Judge Pedro B. Corales)
On August 22, 2007, a Resolution was issued by this Court denying with finality the Motion for Reconsideration filed by complainant Ferdinand A. Cruz, directing that no further pleadings or motions shall be entertained in this case, and considering this case closed and terminated. The Motion for Reconsideration stemmed from the February 5, 2007 Resolution of the Court which resolved to:
2. DISMISS the instant administrative complaint for utter lack of merit; andOn October 9, 2007, a letter from complainant was received by the Office of Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr., which seeks to �clarify and seek enlightenment together with [the office�s] wisdom on what in particular did [complainant] do wrong to be considered as transgression and merit ADMONITION so that the same can be avoided given a warning that similar transgressions will be severely dealt with.� (Emphasis supplied.)
3. ADMONISH complainant Ferdinand A. Cruz to observe due respect toward the officers and the processes involved in the administration of justice, with WARNING that future similar transgressions would be dealt with more severely.
After a scrutiny of the submissions of the parties, the Court concludes that the complaint against Judge Pedro B. Corales is bereft of merit. In resolving the complaint, we find merit in the report and evaluation of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) that complainant has registered numerous unfounded administrative complaints against judges and several prosecutors that have prejudiced the orderly administration of justice, thus:
Upon the other hand, complainant's penchant for filing cases against judges and prosecutors truly deserves to be checked. In addition to this complaint, the other administrative cases initiated by complainant include: (1) G.R. No. 154464, entitled �Ferdinand Cruz v. Judge Priscilla Mijares, et al.," for Abuse of Authority; (2) G.R. No. 170404, entitled "Ferdinand Cruz v. Judge Henrick Gingoyon," Petition for Certiorari; (3) Ferdinand Cruz v. Prosecutor Napoleon Matienzo, for Ignorance of the Law; (4) Ferdinand Cruz v. Prosecutor Felix Reyes, for Ignorance of the Law; [and] (5) Ferdinand Cruz v. Prosecutor Generoso Everhardo, for Ignorance of the Law. These are on top of the seventy-eight civil and criminal cases between him and Mr. Benjamin Mina before the MeTCs of Pasay City, where both protagonists have asked the inhibition of each of the handling judges, all of whom but one have already inhibited.The foregoing considerations amply explain the admonition made on complainant to observe due respect toward the officials involved in the administration of justice.
This scheme is distressing, nay, reflective of a lack of respect to people who are sworn to dispense justice. It seriously affects the efficiency of the members of the Judiciary in administering fair, speedy and impartial justice. Moreover, complainant's penchant for filing motions for inhibition, apparently shopping for judges favorable to his cause, undeniably taxes much of the valuable time of the Court.
Although the Court will not tolerate or condone any act, conduct or omission that would violate the norm of public accountability or diminish the people's faith in the judiciary, neither will it hesitate to shield those under its employ from unfounded suits that only serve to disrupt rather than promote the orderly administration of justice. (Citation omitted.)
SO OREDERED.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court
(Sgd.) LUDICHI YASAY-NUNAG
Clerk of Court