CIRCULAR
NO. 3-89
TO: COURT
OF APPEALS, SANDIGANBAYAN, COURT OF TAX APPEALS, REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS,
METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT
TRIAL
COURTS, SHARI’A DISTRICT COURT AND SHARI’A CIRCUIT COURTS, ALL MEMBERS
OF THE GOVERNMENT PROSECUTION SERVICE AND ALL MEMBERS OF THE INTEGRATED
BAR OF THE PHILIPPINES
SUBJECT:
COMPLAINTS FILED WITH THE IBP AGAINST JUSTICES AND JUDGES OF THE LOWER
COURTS.
For the
information
and guidance of all concerned, quoted hereunder is the Resolution of
the
En Banc dated January 31, 1989 clarifying Resolution dated
November
29, 1988 in "Re: Letter of [Acting] Presiding Justice Rodolfo A. Nocon
and Associate Justice Reynato S. Puno and Alfredo Marigomen of the
Court
of Appeals:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
"The
Court noted
the letter dated December 19, 1988 by Dr. Leon M. Garcia, Jr.,
President,
Integrated Bar of the Philippines [IBP] to the Supreme Court seeking a
resolution "reconsidering/clarifying" the Resolution of this
Court
dated November 29, 1988 relating to complaints filed with the IBP
against
justices and judges of the lower courts.
"After careful
consideration
of Hon. Garcia’s letter, the Court Resolved to reiterate its Resolution
dated November 29, 1988 directing that "all complaints against justices
and judges of the lower courts filed with the Commission on Bar
Discipline
should promptly be referred to the Supreme Court for appropriate
action."
This Resolution is properly regarded as an interpretation of Section 1,
second paragraph of Rule 139-B of the Revised Rules of Court, such that
"attorney’s in the government service" should be understood as not
including
members of the Court of Appeals, the Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax
Appeals
and Judges of the lower courts. In general, the Court is here referring
to those who perform judicial functions and before whose courts the
members
of the IBP appear in the exercise of their profession.
"The Court
still has
under consideration the case of fiscals and other government
prosecuting
attorneys, as well as government lawyers whose office duties do not
consist
of the adjudication of cases or disputes. The Court will inform the IBP
when it shall have reached a conclusion in respect of fiscals and
prosecuting
attorneys.
"The Court
addresses
below the 'matters which need clarification' set out in Hon. Garcia’s
letter:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
[1] The
IBP (Board
of Governors and Commission on Bar Discipline) shall forward to the
Supreme
Court, for appropriate action, all cases involving justices and judges
of lower courts, whether or not such complaints deal with acts
apparently
unrelated to the discharge of their official functions, such as acts of
immorality, estafa, crimes against persons and property, etc.
[2] As
noted above,
this Resolution as well as our Resolution dated November 29, 1988
constitute
an interpretation of Section 1, Rule 139-B.cralaw:red
[3] In
principle,
the Supreme Court would not assign complaints filed with it against
justices
and judges of the lower courts to the IBP for investigation after the
Supreme
Court shall have found a probable cause in such charges. As a matter of
long standing practice, the Court has assigned complaints against
Municipal
or Metropolitan Trial Judges to an Executive Judge, against Regional
Trial
Courts judges to a Justice of the Court of Appeals for investigation,
report
and recommendation, while a complaint against a member of the Court of
Appeals would probably be assigned to a member of the Supreme Court for
investigation, report and recommendation.cralaw:red
[4] The
IBP shall
refer to the Supreme Court all cases filed against judges, including
complaints
charging judges jointly with practicing lawyers, whether filed directly
with the IBP or transmitted to the IBP by the Office of the Solicitor
General.
The Supreme Court will examine these complaints individually and on a
case
by case basis. The Court may refer such a case for joint investigation
to an Executive Judge of a Regional Trial Court or to a justice of the
Court of Appeals. There may, however, be instances when the case
against
the practicing lawyer may be separable and conveniently referred to the
IBP for investigation.cralaw:red
[5] The
Court will
scrutinize very carefully any claim by other lawyers in the government
service that complaints against them be referred to this Court rather
than
to the IBP. The Court looks forward to comments thereon by the IBP
should
such claims be made.cralaw:red
[6] It
appears to
the Court that the IBP has been quite busy with the number of cases
already
referred to it involving private petitioners. The Court continues
to follow the work of the IBP in this area with great interest and high
expectations."
February 6, 1989.
[Sgd.]
MARCELO
B. FERNANChief
Justice
|