Adm. Matter No. 2268-MJ - NOVEMBER 1980 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE Adm. Matter No. 2268-MJNovember 7, 1980 Ricardo Escarda vs. Jacinto Manalo G.R. No. L-53466November 10, 1980 Rural Bank of Oroquieta (Mis. Occ.) vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-54169November 10, 1980 Rosario S. Que vs. Court of Appeals, et al A.M. No. 761November 17, 1980 Ester Flores vs. Atty. Luis Castillo Reyno A.M. No. 1171-MJNovember 17, 1980 Marcelino Singson, Sr. vs. Mun. Judge Pablo L. Villanueva A.M. No. 1387-MJNovember 17, 1980 Lourdes Flor vs. Mun. Judge Nicanor J. Cruz, Jr. A.M. No. P-1549November 17, 1980 Raul C. Briz vs. Faustino Encinares, Jr. ADM. CASE No. 1681November 17, 1980 Modesta Rodriguez vs. Attys. Pedro Tagala, et al. G.R. No. L-26823November 17, 1980 Malayan Insurance Company vs. Smith, Bell & Co. (Phil.) Inc. G.R. No. L-38635November 17, 1980 People of the Philippines vs. Daniel Hayag G.R. No. L-41686November 17, 1980 People of the Philippines vs. Court of First Instance of Rizal Separate OpinionJustice Teehankee G.R. No. L-50097November 17, 1980 Continental Bazar vs. Hon. Amado G. Inciong G.R. No. L-50711November 17, 1980 Simeon Aramburo vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-51269November 17, 1980 Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Spouses Rufo Tomeldan G.R. No. L-51944November 17, 1980 Agapita Opeña Vda. De Imperial vs. Hon. Rafael De La Cruz G.R. No. L-52153November 17, 1980 Klm Royal Dutch Airlines vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-52242November 17, 1980 Miguel R. Unson III vs. Hon. Pedro C. Navarro G.R. No. L-54324-28November 19, 1980 Jasmin S. Nogoy vs. City Judge Filemon Mendoza, Jr. A.M. No. 1541-MJNovember 21, 1980 Fidel Morta, Sr. vs. Mun. Judge Cipriano B. Alvizo, Jr. A.M. No. 2044-CFINovember 21, 1980 Pedro G. Peralta vs. Judge Romeo N. Firme G.R. No. L-29485November 21, 1980 Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Ayala Securities Corporation G.R. No. L-29576November 21, 1980 Francisco Cocotano vs. Republic of the Phil. G.R. No. L-33303November 21, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Rodolfo Gonzales G.R. No. L-39712November 21, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Gomez Saligan G.R. No. L-53619November 21, 1980 Modesta R. Sabeniano vs. Comelec A.M. No. P-260November 28, 1980 Florentino R. Calayag vs. Rufino De Asas G.R. No. 52830November 28, 1980 Antonio O. Singco vs. Com. on Elections G.R. No. L-24238November 28, 1980 Jose Santos vs. Lorenzo J. Liwag G.R. No. L-24852November 28, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Rodolfo Talay G.R. No. L-30019November 28, 1980 Agripina Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals G.R. No. L-30780November 28, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Dalmacio Pahil G.R. No. L-32949November 28, 1980 Jose D. Santos vs. Hon. Benjamin H. Aquino G.R. No. L-33296November 28, 1980 Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions vs. Court of Industrial Relations G.R. No. L-35148November 28, 1980 Constancio Jaugan vs. Hon. Vicente P. Bullecer G.R. No. L-36008November 28, 1980 Mauro G. Agda vs. Crispin N. San Juan G.R. No. L-43833November 28, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Sotero L. Navarrete G.R. No. L-49910November 28, 1980 The People of the Phils. vs. Loreto Aquiapas G.R. No. L-54039November 28, 1980 Guillermo S. Arcenas vs. Commission on Elections G.R. No. L-54043November 28, 1980 Bangued Water District vs. Harold M. Hernando G.R. No. L-54641November 28, 1980 People of the Phils. vs. Court of Appeals The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. Ricardo Escarda vs. Jacinto Manalo Rural Bank of Oroquieta (Mis. Occ.) vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Rosario S. Que vs. Court of Appeals, et al Ester Flores vs. Atty. Luis Castillo Reyno Marcelino Singson, Sr. vs. Mun. Judge Pablo L. Villanueva Lourdes Flor vs. Mun. Judge Nicanor J. Cruz, Jr. Raul C. Briz vs. Faustino Encinares, Jr. Modesta Rodriguez vs. Attys. Pedro Tagala, et al. Malayan Insurance Company vs. Smith, Bell & Co. (Phil.) Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Daniel Hayag People of the Philippines vs. Court of First Instance of Rizal Separate OpinionJustice Teehankee Continental Bazar vs. Hon. Amado G. Inciong Simeon Aramburo vs. Court of Appeals Development Bank of the Philippines vs. Spouses Rufo Tomeldan Agapita Opeña Vda. De Imperial vs. Hon. Rafael De La Cruz Klm Royal Dutch Airlines vs. Court of Appeals Miguel R. Unson III vs. Hon. Pedro C. Navarro Jasmin S. Nogoy vs. City Judge Filemon Mendoza, Jr. Fidel Morta, Sr. vs. Mun. Judge Cipriano B. Alvizo, Jr. Pedro G. Peralta vs. Judge Romeo N. Firme Commissioner of Internal Revenue vs. Ayala Securities Corporation Francisco Cocotano vs. Republic of the Phil. The People of the Phils. vs. Rodolfo Gonzales The People of the Phils. vs. Gomez Saligan Modesta R. Sabeniano vs. Comelec Florentino R. Calayag vs. Rufino De Asas Antonio O. Singco vs. Com. on Elections Jose Santos vs. Lorenzo J. Liwag The People of the Phils. vs. Rodolfo Talay Agripina Bernardo vs. Court of Appeals The People of the Phils. vs. Dalmacio Pahil Jose D. Santos vs. Hon. Benjamin H. Aquino Philippine Association of Free Labor Unions vs. Court of Industrial Relations Constancio Jaugan vs. Hon. Vicente P. Bullecer Mauro G. Agda vs. Crispin N. San Juan The People of the Phils. vs. Sotero L. Navarrete The People of the Phils. vs. Loreto Aquiapas Guillermo S. Arcenas vs. Commission on Elections Bangued Water District vs. Harold M. Hernando People of the Phils. vs. Court of Appeals The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Manila
EN BANC
Adm. Matter No. 2268-MJ November 7, 1980
RICARDO ESCARDA,complainant,
vs.
Judge JACINTO MANALO of Coron, Palawan,respondent.
FERNANDO,C.J.:
This administrative complaint for improper conduct by complainant Ricardo Escarda against respondent Municipal Judge Jacinto Manalo of Coron, Palawan affords this Court an opportunity to set forth the guiding principle as to when theLupon Tagapayapaunder the Katarungan Pambarangay Decree1should take cognizance of a case. Respondent Judge refused the referral of a complaint for slight physical injuries to theLupon Tagapayapa.That was the basis of this charge against him. As the Decree was intended to remedy the clogged state of the dockets through the amicable settlement of minor disputes relying on what was aptly referred to by President Marcos as "the good sense and civic spirit of our citizenry and our community leaders," respondent Judge should be held accountable, if, as alleged, he did not comply with its provisions. His refusal, however, finds support in Circular No. 122of the late Chief Justice Castro, as amended by Circular No. 22.3It reads as follows,. "Effective upon your receipt of the certification by the Minister of Local Government and Community Development that an the barangays within your respective jurisdictions have organized theirLuponsprovided for in Presidential Decree No. 1508, otherwise known as theKatarungang PambarangayLaw, in implementation of the barangay system of settlement of disputes, you are hereby directed to desist from receiving complaints, petitions, actions or proceedings in cases falling within the authority of saidLupons.Circular No. 12 dated October 30, 1978, issued by the late Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro is to that extent modified."4
Circular No. 22 was noted in a Letter of Implementation5of President Ferdinand E. Marcos, dated November 12, 1979, the first paragraph of which reads as follows: "with a view to easing up the log-jam of cases and solving the problem of backlogs in the case of dockets of an government offices involved in the investigation, trial and adjudication of cases, it is hereby ordered that immediate implementation be made by all government officials and offices concerned of the system of amicably settling disputes at the barangay level as provided for in the Katarungang Pambarangay Law (Presidential Decree No. 1508)."6It then ordered "effective compliance" with certain directives one of which is the aforesaid Circular No. 22.7Then came this paragraph: "For this purpose, all City and Municipal Development Officers of the Ministry of Local Government and Community Development are hereby ordered to certify the fact of organization of theLupong Tagapayapain their respective barangays within five (5) days from the publication of this order, and to send such certification to the Ministry of Justice and the Supreme Court, as well as to the fiscals and judges concerned."8Prior to such certification of the organization of theLupon Tagapayapathen, a municipal judge must comply with the Rules of Court applicable to any complaint or judicial proceeding properly cognizable by him. That is his bounden duty. Since there is no question as to the particular case of physical injuries falling within the jurisdiction of respondent Judge, he acted in accordance with law. As noted in the memorandum of Court Administrator Relova: "In the case at bar, Criminal Case No. 2041 was filed before any such certification. Therefore, respondent need not refer the case to the barangay captain or the Lupon."9
The complaint for improper judicial conduct is therefore without merit.ℒαwρhi৷Accordingly, it should be dismissed. As mentioned at the outset of this opinion, this resolution is intended to provide guidance for the actuation of the judges concerned, more specifically as to the date when in accordance with Presidential Decree No. 1508 the system of conciliation provide ed for therein should be followed before the judiciary could act on the matter.
WHEREFORE,this administrative complaint is dismissed for lack of merit. Let a copy of this resolution be spread on the record of respondent Judge Jacinto Manalo.
Teehankee, Barredo, Makasiar, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Fernandez, Guerrero, Abad Santos, De Castro and Melencio-Herrera, JJ., concur.
Footnotes