A.M. No. 1571-CFI - FEBRUARY 1978 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE A.M. No. 1571-CFIFebruary 7, 1978 In Re: Gibson A. Araula G.R. No. L-40706February 16, 1978 Danao Dev't. Corp. vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Com. G.R. No. L-44062February 16, 1978 Pablo L. Mirando vs. Wellington Ty & Bros. Inc. A.M. No. 1113February 22, 1978 Conrado Custodio, Sr. vs. Ireneo Z. Esto A.M. No. 1644February 22, 1978 Erlinda Maderable vs. Salvador Castellano G.R. No. L-21935February 22, 1978 Pilar T. Bautista vs. Jose Ma. Maxino G.R. No. L-46117February 22, 1978 Francisco M. Bautista vs. Alfredo S. Rebueno G.R. No. L-29096February 23, 1978 Amado Dehesa vs. Felix V. Macalalag G.R. No. L-29893February 23, 1978 People of the Philippines vs. Herminigildo Pascual G.R. No. L-38169February 23, 1978 People of the Philippines vs. Aurelio Sabater G.R. No. L-31115February 24, 1978 Lucilo U. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-25786February 27, 1978 Luciano Pestanas vs. Josefa Dyogi G.R. No. L-37787February 27, 1978 Atilano Adlawan vs. Julian E. Lustre G.R. No. L-46650February 27, 1978 Jose L.C. Dizon vs. Milagros A. German A.M. No. 1741February 28, 1978 Estelita Formoso vs. Francisco Ante A.M. No. 272February 28, 1978 Pablo A. Arde vs. Gregorio Anicoche A.M. No. P-128February 28, 1978 Felipe Tantingco vs. Henrietto Z. Aguilar A.M. No. P-142February 28, 1978 Carmencita Guadalupe vs. Gregorio Tronco G.R. No. L-21914February 28, 1978 T.J. Wolff & Co. Inc. vs. Demetrio Moralde G.R. No. L-24300February 28, 1978 Maria Locsin Vda. De Araneta vs. Edith Perez De Tagle-Marcelo G.R. No. L-36479February 28, 1978 Justino L. David vs. Hon. Mayor Antonio J. Villegas G.R. No. L-40390February 28, 1978 Lao Oh Kim vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Com. G.R. No. L-42390February 28, 1978 Eunila Marapo vs. Philippines Packing Corp. G.R. No. L-42507February 28, 1978 Carlita C. Trinidad vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-42587February 28, 1978 Meo Sebastian vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission G.R. No. L-42654February 28, 1978 Teresita Vda. De Torres vs. Warner Barnes & Co. Inc. G.R. No. L-43089February 28, 1978 Cirila Ligason vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-43352February 28, 1978 Manuel Arianza vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-43689February 28, 1978 Benigno Gonzales vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-43880February 28, 1978 Simeon A. Cañonero vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-45642February 28, 1978 Ramon Salaria vs. Carlos R. Buenviaje G.R. No. L-45834February 28, 1978 Leon Mercado vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. G.R. No. L-46182February 28, 1978 Jaime Gapoy vs. Midpantao L. Adil G.R. No. L-46265February 28, 1978 Dominador Abril vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No. L-46470February 28, 1978 Rizalino V. De Leon vs. Philippines National Bank G.R. No. L-46763February 28, 1978 Antonio Vasco vs. Court of Appeals The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. In Re: Gibson A. Araula Danao Dev't. Corp. vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Com. Pablo L. Mirando vs. Wellington Ty & Bros. Inc. Conrado Custodio, Sr. vs. Ireneo Z. Esto Erlinda Maderable vs. Salvador Castellano Pilar T. Bautista vs. Jose Ma. Maxino Francisco M. Bautista vs. Alfredo S. Rebueno Amado Dehesa vs. Felix V. Macalalag People of the Philippines vs. Herminigildo Pascual People of the Philippines vs. Aurelio Sabater Lucilo U. Garcia vs. Court of Appeals Luciano Pestanas vs. Josefa Dyogi Atilano Adlawan vs. Julian E. Lustre Jose L.C. Dizon vs. Milagros A. German Estelita Formoso vs. Francisco Ante Pablo A. Arde vs. Gregorio Anicoche Felipe Tantingco vs. Henrietto Z. Aguilar Carmencita Guadalupe vs. Gregorio Tronco T.J. Wolff & Co. Inc. vs. Demetrio Moralde Maria Locsin Vda. De Araneta vs. Edith Perez De Tagle-Marcelo Justino L. David vs. Hon. Mayor Antonio J. Villegas Lao Oh Kim vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Com. Eunila Marapo vs. Philippines Packing Corp. Carlita C. Trinidad vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Meo Sebastian vs. Workmen's Compensation Commission Teresita Vda. De Torres vs. Warner Barnes & Co. Inc. Cirila Ligason vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Manuel Arianza vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Benigno Gonzales vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Simeon A. Cañonero vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Ramon Salaria vs. Carlos R. Buenviaje Leon Mercado vs. Workmen's Compensation Com. Jaime Gapoy vs. Midpantao L. Adil Dominador Abril vs. People of the Philippines Rizalino V. De Leon vs. Philippines National Bank Antonio Vasco vs. Court of Appeals The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Manila
EN BANC
A.M. No. 1571-CFI February 7, 1978
ANONYMOUS COMPLAINT AGAINST DISTRICT JUDGE GIBSON A. ARAULA, COURT OF FIRST INSTANCE OF SOUTHERN LEYTE, BRANCH X.
R E S O L U T I O N
BARREDO,J.:
Administrative complaint in the form of two identically worded anonymous letters, one addressed to the Chief Justice and the Associate Justices, the President 6f the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, signed merely by "A CONCERNED CITIZEN and TAXPAYER" and dated December 10, 1976 and the other addressed to the Solicitor General and the Director of the National Bureau of Investigation, signed by "A TAXPAYER" and dated February 15, 1977, charging respondent as follows:
This is to inform you that one of the judges of the Court of First Instance for the Province of Leyte, GIBSON A. ARAULA, District Judge, 10th Judicial District, Branch X, San Juan, Southern Leyte, has a criminal record for FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE at the time of his application and appointment for a seat in the judiciary, a copy of the INFORMATION is hereto attached marked as ANNEX 'A', and has persistently and continued to withhold his criminal record from the Supreme Court in his PERSONAL DATA SHEET for 1975, a copy of which is hereto attached marked as ANNEX 'B'.
Although the Court does not as a rule act on anonymous complaints, cases are excepted in which the charge could be fully borne by public records of indubitable integrity, thus needing no corroboration by evidence to be offered by complainant, whose Identity and integrity could hardly be material where the matter involved is of public interest. And as it is obvious that the above charge comes within this exception, respondent was required to comment and the case was referred to Justice Nestor B. Alampay for investigation and recommendation.
It appears that the personal data sheet mentioned in the charge was prepared by respondent on May 30, 1975. It requiredinter aliathe filling of blanks regarding "Record of Criminal and/or Administrative Cases". Respondent mentioned therein only an administrative case wherein he was investigated, filed on December 19, 1972, but which was dismissed after the investigation on December 18, 1973. He failed to state the criminal case referred to in the complaint: a criminal case for alleged frustrated homicide docketed as Criminal Case No. 7986 of the Court of First Instance of Negros Oriental filed on July 5, 1966 and subsequently dismissed upon motion of the fiscal on June 17, 1970.
The excuse given by respondent for such omission is oversight. The incident involved in that criminal case occurred about ten years before he prepared his data sheet and he had actually forgotten the same already.ℒαwρhi৷Besides, as just stated, it was dismissal without any trial, and the blanks to be filled did not specifically refer to the fact alone of his being charged regardless of the result, but to criminal and/or administrative cases, which usually connote trial and conviction or acquittal.
In any event, the Investigator has found that actually, in respondent's application for appointment to the judiciary as well as in his information sheet submitted to the Commission on Appointments, he mentioned the said criminal case. It is, therefore, clear that the omission complained of was not motivated by malice, bad faith or deliberate intent to mislead anyone concerned. While it is best that respondent should complete his personal data sheet in order to include the criminal case in question, it is Our view that his failure to mention that case in his personal data sheet referred to in the complaint is not of such a nature as to warrant administrative sanction, albeit respondent should be admonished to be more careful in the future in submitting information required for his personal service record.
WHEREFORE,this case is dismissed. Respondent is however admonished to be more careful in preparing his personal service and data record.
Antonio, Muñoz Palma, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Martin, Santos, Fernandez and Guerrera, JJ., concur.
Castro, C.J, Fernando and Makasiar, JJ., concur in the result.
Teehankee, J., took no part.