CIRCULAR
NO. 17 [1988]
TO: THE
COURT OF APPEALS, ALL JUDGES OF THE REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS, COURT OF TAX
APPEALS, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS IN CITIES,
MUNICIPAL
TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURTS,
SHARI’A CIRCUIT COURTS AND THE IBP
SUBJECT:
COMPLAINTS AGAINST JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF THE LOWER COURTS FILED WITH
THE
COMMISSION ON BAR DISCIPLINE TO BE PROMPTLY REFERRED TO THE SUPREME
COURT
FOR APPROPRIATE ACTION.
Quoted hereunder,
for the information and guidance of all concerned, is the Resolution of
the Court En Banc dated November 29, 1988 in "Re: Letter of
Acting
Presiding Justice Rodolfo A. Nocon and Associate Justices Reynato Puno
and Alfredo Marigomen of the Court of Appeals."
"Acting
on the
letter of Acting Presiding Justice Rodolfo A. Nocon and Associate
Justices
Reynato Puno and Alfredo Marigomen of the Court of Appeals (First
Division)
dated November 11, 1988, addressed to Chief Justice Marcelo B. Fernan,
the Court Resolved to require the IBP Commission on Bar Discipline
headed
by Atty. Jose F. Racela, Jr., Executive Commissioner, to refer the
complaint
filed by Atty. Eduardo R. Balaoing docketed as CBD Case No. 055 to this
Court for appropriate action as the said complaint was filed against
them
in their capacity as Court of Appeals Justices regarding a petition
filed
before their division. The assumption of such jurisdiction is a
duplication
of the Court’s exclusive sphere of authority and power, not to mention
its far-reaching ill effects on the administration of justice as
provided
for in Section 11, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution, which states:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
‘Section
11. The
members of the Supreme Court and judges of the lower courts shall hold
office during good behavior until they reach the age of seventy years
or
become incapacitated to discharge the duties of their office. The
Supreme
Court en banc shall have the power to discipline judges of
lower
courts, or order their dismissal by vote of a majority of the members
who
actually took part in the deliberations on the issues in the case and
voted
thereon.’
A review of
the history
of Rule 139-B on Disbarment and Discipline of Attorneys will show that
the IBP’s proposal to be given jurisdiction over complaints against a
Justice
of the Court of Appeals or judge of a lower court was rejected in its
final
draft. Thus, the second paragraph of Section 3 of the Draft of the
Proposed
New Rule 139 suggested by the IBP which grants authority to its Board
of
Governors to act on complaints against a Justice of the Court of
Appeals
or judge of the lower court is conspicuously dropped in its final
version.
In view whereof, all complaints against Justices and Judges of the
lower
court filed with the Commission on Bar Discipline should promptly be
referred
to the Supreme Court for appropriate action."Strict
compliance herewith
is hereby enjoined.
December 20, 1988.
[Sgd.]
MAXIMO
A. MACERENCourt
Administrator
|