June 2011 - Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
Philippine Supreme Court Resolutions
[A.M. No. OCA-IPI 08-125-CA-J : June 14, 2011]
ABELARDO SILVERIO V. ASSOCIATE JUSTICE RAMON BATO, JR., COURT OF APPEALS
"A.M. No. OCA-IPI 08-125-CA-J (Abelardo Silverio v. Associate Justice Ramon Bato, Jr., Court of Appeals).
RESOLUTION
On April 10, 2008 a certain Abelardo Silverio (Silverio) wrote then Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez of the Court of Appeals (CA) a letter, copy furnished Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno and Court Administrator Zenaida Elepa�o, calling attention to CA Associate Justice Ramon M. Bato, Jr.'s "illegal, scandalous and anomalous conduct� of acting as ponente in the case of "Strategic Alliance Development Corporation v. Star Infrastructure Development Corporation, et al"[1] pending before the CA's Special Fifth Division.
Silverio claimed that Justice Bato had been observed privately meeting with Aderito Yujuico (Yujuico) and Robert Wong (Wong), respondents in the case. Yujuico announced, after the meeting that Justice Bato had been "taken cared of." Yujuico even boasted that in exchange for a favorable judgment in the case, Justice Bato demanded and received a substantial sum, said to be intended for Justices Andres Reyes, Jr., Jose Catral Mendoza, and Bato himself.
To confirm the illicit deal, Silverio claimed that he hired a special investigator who found out that Justice Bato, as ponente, already prepared a draft decision in Yujuico and Wong's favor. Justice Bato then openly convinced Justices Reyes and Mendoza to concur in the decision in consideration of certain sums of money. The investigator also said that Justice Bato was a regular golfer and had been seen playing with two or three CA Justices and lawyer friends at the Aguinaldo Golf Course and Muni Golf Course in Manila. Silverio concluded from this that Justice Bato had a lavish lifestyle, grossly disproportionate to his income as CA Justice.
Silverio sought an investigation of Justice Bato's alleged corrupt activities and his disqualification from the Strategic Alliance case on the ground of serious misconduct and conduct unbecoming of a CA justice.
On April 29, 2008 the Court issued a resolution, requiring Silverio to formalize his charge against Justice Bato. But when the resolution was served at his given address at "Iridium St., Sta. Ana, Manila," the same was returned unserved due to "'insufficient address." Thus, the Court resolved to consider as served on him the resolution of April 29, 2008.
Court Administrator Elepa�o also wrote Silverio at the same address, informing him that his complaint against Justice Bato could not be given due course because of its failure to comply with the requirements of Section 1, Rule 140, as amended by A.M. 01-8-10-SC and that, should Silverio wish to pursue his complaint, he should comply with such requirements. To this date, the Court has not received Silverio's compliance with them.
In his letter-comment, Justice Bato denied Silverio's accusations, calling them unfounded and malicious. He denied knowing Yujuico and Wong, meeting with them, or receiving money from them in connection with the case Silverio mentioned. Justice Bato also denied having �openly and actively" convinced Justices Reyes and Mendoza to concur in his draft decision in exchange for money.
Evidently, Justice Bato could not have approached Justice Reyes in connection with Strategic Alliance case, the draft decision of which was first circulated only on February 12, 2008. Justice Reyes had inhibited himself from the case for personal reasons as early as October 5, 2007. In his sworn affidavit of May 7, 2008, Justice Mendoza categorically declared that "With all honesty and with a clear conscience, 1 can personally attest to the fact that Justice Bato, Jr. never tried to convince me, or even persuade me, to concur with his ponencia much less offer money, x x x in connection with the x x x case."[2] In any event, to erase any doubt regarding his impartiality, Justice Bato inhibited himself from the case on April 14, 2008.
Regarding the charge that he lived a lavish lifestyle as a golfer, Justice Bato admitted playing golf with other CA Justices as a form of exercise. He claims, however, that he avoided playing with private practitioners to prevent any gossip. The games were not expensive since he could play in public courses like Aguinaldo Golf Course and Muni Golf Course (the Intramuros Golf Club) for only P650.00, including the caddy's fee.
Justice Bato submitted a certification issued by the Barangay Chairman of Sta. Ana, Manila, stating that �no such person by the name of ABELARDO SILVERIO of Iridium St., Sta. Ana, Manila is a resident of this barangay.''[3]
The Court has no option but dismiss Silverio's complaint, assuming he exists, on the ground of his failure to comply with the requirements that his complaint be verified and that it be supported by affidavits of persons who have personal knowledge of the facts he alleged or by some documents as provided under Section 1, Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. 01-8-10-SC.
What is more, even if Silverio's letter were to be regarded as an anonymous letter-complaint, it provides nothing for the Court to work on considering that its "averments and material allegations x x x are neither verifiable from public records of indubitable integrity nor supported by other competent evidence."[4]
While administrative proceedings are not strictly bound by the formal rules of evidence, the liberality of procedure in such proceedings is still subject to the limitations imposed by the requirement of due process. This demands that, if the respondent judge were to be disciplined for grave misconduct, the evidence against him should be competent, derived from the witness' personal knowledge. The Court cannot give credence to charges based on mere suspicion or speculation.[5]
WHEREFORE, the Court DENIES due course to the letter-complaint of Abelardo Silverio, whose existence could not be established, for failure to comply with Section 1, Rule 140 of the Revised Rules of Court, as amended by A.M. 01-8-10-SC and DISMISSES the same for lack of the proof required in administrative actions." Corona, C.J., on official leave. Brion, J., on leave. Mendoza, J., has no part.
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) ENRIQUETA E. VIDAL
Clerk of Court
Endnotes:
[1] Docketed as CA-G.R. SP 96945.
[2] Manifestation and Motion, p. 3.
[3] Annex "1."
[4] Re: Letter-Complaint of Atty. Ariel Samson, et al. against Associate Justice Michael P. Elbinias, A.M. No. OCA-IPI 08-127-CA-J, January 11, 2011.
[5] Ang v. Judge Asis, 424 Phil. 105, 116 (2002).
