OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR vs. EXECUTIVE JUDGE
OWEN B. AMOR, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, DAET, CAMARINES NORTE, A.M. No.
RTJ-08-2140 . October 7, 2014 (Formerly A.M. No. 00-2-86-RTC)
Facts:
In the Memorandum which he
submitted pursuant to the verbal instruction of then Court Administrator
Alfredo L. Benipayo, Judge Contreras reported on the alleged
acts of respondent, as follows:
First, Respondent impounded the tricycle of a
certain Gervin Ojeda. when the latter bumped the former’s vehicle and was
unable to pay the amount demanded for the incurred damages.
1.
When Judge Contreras called the attention of SG
Morico of the wrong date, the latter took the certification and went straight
to respondent’s chambers. After leaving the chambers, SG Morico became
"belligerent and discourteous" and refused to return the
certification to Judge Contreras.
2.
Thus, Judge Contreras sought the assistance of
Judge Sancho Dames and 2nd Assistant Provincial Prosecutor Leo Intia in order
to retrieve the aforesaid certification from SG Morico, but to no avail.
3.
Thereafter, Judge Contreras learned that
respondent had berated the guards of the Hall of Justice, including SG Morico,
for issuing the certification, and that SG Morico and Head Guard Quintin
Fernandez tried to conceal the alleged acts of grave abuse of authority by
respondent.
Second, Judge Lalwani called respondent to seek
reconsideration of her detail to another station. Respondent then berated Judge
Lalwani and accused her of being lazy and abusive like the other judges of
Camarines Sur who were also detailed at Camarines Norte. Further, respondent
instructed Judge Lalwani to go slow with the trial of a BP 22 case as the accused therein was his
friend.
Third, respondent visited Judge Contreras at the
latter’s and personally intervened for one Atty. Freddie Venida (Atty. Venida),
who was previously arrested and charged with indirect contempt. Respondent then told Judge Contreras that he does
not mind Atty. Verida’s abusive practice as he gives him gold. udge Contreras
rejected respondent’s indecent overtures, etc.
Respondent
continued to ignore the said directives, the Court issued a Resolution.
Meanwhile, respondent filed his certificate of
candidacy (COC) for the 2002 Barangay Elections, resulting in his automatic
resignation from the service
Issue:
Whether respondent’s failure to comment on
the administrative complaint despite being given an opportunity to do so is
tantamount to an admission of the truth of the allegations against him
Held:
Yes. In the instant case, the
OCA correctly found respondent guilty of the charges against him. As aptly
pointed out, respondent’s failure to file a comment despite all the
opportunities afforded him constituted a waiver of his right to defend himself.
In the natural order of things, a man would resist an unfounded claim or
imputation against him. It is generally contrary to human nature to remain
silent and say nothing in the face of false accusations. As such, respondent’s
silence may thus be construed as an implied admission and acknowledgement of
the veracity of the allegations against him.Hence, the Court upholds the OCA’s
findings that respondent: (a) abused his authority in impounding the tricycle
and exerted undue influence on the security guards of the Hall of Justice in
his attempt to obstruct the investigation of Judge Contreras; (b) was
discourteous in dealing with a fellow judge when the latter was merely asking
for reconsideration of her detail to another station; (c) used his office and
position to intervene in behalf of Atty. Venida and tolerated the latter’s
abusive practice as a lawyer in exchange for gold; (d) was habitually absent;
and (e) gave orders to Atty. Loria to submit all petitions for extra-judicial
foreclosures to him which resulted in delays in the proceedings and asked the
latter to demand "grease money" from newspaper publishers in order
not to be blacklisted.
0 Comments