Office of Court Administrator (OCA) v.

Pascual
259 SCRA 604 | July 29, 1996
HERMOSISIMO JR., J.

Before any member of the Judiciary could be faulted, it should be only after due
investigation and after presentation of competent evidence derived from direct knowledge,
especially since the charge is penal in character.

FACTS

Administrative Case against JUDGE FILOMENO PASCUAL

- One CEFERINO TIGAS wrote a letter, addressed to OCA of SC, charging that irregularities
and corruption were being committed by the RESPONDENT Presiding Judge of MTC
- Letter was referred to NBI for “discreet investigation” of respondent.
o Proceeded to Angat, Bulacan, in order to look for Ceferino Tigas, the letter writer but
realized was a fictitious character.
o Proceeded to the residence of CANDIDO CRUZ, an accused in respondent’s sala.
- In affidavit, Cruz declared that he was the accused in a criminal case for Frustrated Murder.
o Respondent judge decided that the crime he committed was only physical injuries
o Cruz made to understand that, in view of such action, Cruz was to give him P2,000
 Respondent judge also believed to be a drunkard
- NBI entrapped Respondent judge with help of Cruz, for which reason, the judge was thought
to have been caught in flagrante delicto.
- Result of investigation and Respondent referred to the Inquest Prosecutor of the Office of the
Special Prosecutor, Ombudsman, with the recommendation that he be charged and
prosecuted for Bribery (Art. 210 RPC)
o Executive Judge NATIVIDAD G. DIZON submitted report and recommendation that
Respondent judge be penalized for violation of Canons 2 and 3 of Code of Judicial
Conduct (A Judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all
activities and a judge should perform official duties honestly, and with impartiality
and diligence).

ISSUES AND HOLDING

1. Whether or not the evidences presented against Judge Filomeno Pascual were strong
enough to convict him. No

Respondent was not afforded right to open trial wherein respondent can confront
the witnesses against him and present evidence in his defense. Only bases for the Report
and Recommendation submitted consist of: The Complaint, the Answer, the
Memorandum of the respondent, and the transcript of stenographic notes of the hearing of
the bribery case of respondent judge at the Sandiganbayan. Before any member of the
Judiciary could be faulted, it should be only after due investigation and after presentation
of competent evidence derived from direct knowledge, especially since the charge is
penal in character.
ADMINISTRATIVE CASE IS DISMISSED

[SUERTE] C2021 | 1