EN BANC
[ A.M. No. RTJ-90-447, July 12, 1991 ]
EMMA J. CASTILLO, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE MANUEL M. CALANOG, JR., RESPONDENT.
R E S O L U T I O N
PER CURIAM:
In a sworn complaint dated January 17, 1990, docketed as Adm. Matter No. RTJ-90-447, Emma J. Castillo charged Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 76, with immorality and conduct unbecoming of a public official. The sworn complaint is copied in full:
January 17, 1990
The Honorable Justice
Supreme Court of the Philippines
Padre Faura, Manila
Attn: Hon. Marcelo B. Fernan
Chief Justice, Supreme Court
Your Honors:
I would like to register this letter-complaint against the Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 76 who is likewise the incumbent President of the Philippine Judges Association, Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., for immorality and conduct unbecoming of a public official.
Sometime in 1987, when I intervened in the case for (sic) intestate estate of my late common-law husband which was then pending before the RTC, Branch 94, Quezon City, where incidentally Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. was temporarily holding office at that time, the latter was referred to me by an acquaintance of mine as a person who could assist me and help facilitate for (sic) the early termination of the case in my favor. Subsequently, I personally met Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. in his office located at the 11th floor of the Quezon City Hall where he transferred. At the said meeting, he advised me to see him at his law office located in Mandaluyong, Metro Manila which I did. When I met him at noon, he invited me to eat in a restaurant and even asked me to ride with him in his car but instead, to my surprise, he took me to a motel where he made sexual advances on me. As he did not succeed in his evil design, he asked me if I will (sic) agree to the proposition that he be my sub-husband (sic) and promised to give me his condominium unit located at Pagasa Bliss Condominium, Quezon City, as well as to provide financial support for my two (2) minor children and place them in an exclusive school for girls. Due to confusion because of the untimely death of my common-law husband coupled with the persistent pleadings of Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., he was able to convince me. Upon giving my consent, he immediately gave his condominium unit no. 19-22 at Pagasa Bliss Condominium, Quezon City, where l and my two (2) minor daughters reside up to the present. On May 27, 1989, as a result of our relationship, l gave birth to a baby boy which (sic) we named Jerome Christopher Calanog.
Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. is very well-known to my two (2) minor daughters as they fondly called him as "Tito Nonong".
From the time I gave birth to our son Jerome Christopher Calanog, said Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. has refused to provide us financial support nor placed my two (2) minor daughters to an exclusive school as he had promised. Worst, to the present, he fails and refuses to pay the monthly installments of the condominium unit he gave to me despite being informed by the National Housing Authority that we will be evicted from the said place for failure to pay the same. Despite my repeated verbal demands for him to give us, or at least his son Jerome Christopher Calanog; financial support, Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. just ignored my pleas.
May I then ask and pray that justice be given to me and my children or at least for my son Jerome Christopher Calanog? May I further request that the proper sanction be meted against Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. for his conduct unbecoming of a public official and immorality?
Very truly yours,
(Sgd.) EMMA J. CASTILLO
Bldg. 19-22 Bliss Pagasa, Q.C.
SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this Jan. 25, 1990, at Quezon City, Metro Manila, affiant exhibited to me her Res. Cert. No. 500827K issued at Quezon City, Metro Manila, on January 19, 1990.
(Sgd.) JOSE L. MA SANTOS
Notary Public
Comm. until Dec. 31, 1991
PTR No. 8016341-Q.C.
Jan. 2, 1990
TAN: 1525-203-4
Doc. No. 89;
Page No. 19;
Book No. 238;
Series of 1990.
Copy furnished:
All SC Justices
Ombudsman
NBI, Manila[1]
Acting on the complaint filed by Castillo, the Court required the respondent to answer. The respondent took time in answering the complaint. It was only after two motions for extension of time to file answer did he file on April 10, 1990 his two-paragraph Answer dated April 5, 1990 followed by another two-paragraph pleading entitled "Supplemental Answer" dated May 30, 1990. In both answers he simply averred that the complainant "has expressly stated that she is no longer interested in pursuing the same (complaint) and therefore, pray that the said complaint be considered withdrawn." The respondent prayed "that the instant case be considered Withdrawn and/or Dismissed." In his Supplemental Answer he "vehemently denies for being untrue the material allegations of complainant in her letter-complaint dated January 17, 1990." He reiterated his prayer "that the instant case be dismissed." Later, on February 5, 1990, the complainant filed a sworn letter-request dated February 1, 1990, praying that her complaint be considered withdrawn "because I (she) am no longer interested in pursuing it."[2] Just like that.
Notwithstanding the turn of events, the Court, as a matter of procedure in cases of this serious nature, on September 6, 1990, issued a Resolution referring the case to Associate Justice Gloria C. Paras of the Court of Appeals for investigation, report, and recommendation.
In her investigation, Justice Paras heard the testimonies of Ernesto Bustamante and Jose Javier, both employees in the sala of the respondent.
On October 19, 1990, the complainant submitted a formal "Affidavit of Desistance" in which she denied totally the allegations of her complaint:
2. That after I have filed the above-complaint, I began to be bothered by my own conscience inasmuch as what I have narrated therein are not true, especially the fact that I had an amorous relationship with him and that my child namely Jerome Christopher is his son and also the fact that I was given by him a condominium unit located at my above address;
3. That after filing, however, the above-mentioned letter- complaint with the Supreme Court, I have come to my right senses and realized the injustice I have committed against Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., so that as an evidence of repentance and desire on my part to straighten everything I executed that letter addressed to the Honorable Justices of the Supreme Court which I filed with the Office of the Chief Justice on January 26, 1990 manifesting therein that I am considering my subject complaint against Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. as withdrawn and that I am no longer interested in further pursuing it and that recently I asked the forgiveness of Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. for the dishonor I have done to him as a consequence of the subject complaint and I was forgiven by him;[3]
The other witnesses, namely Ernesto Bustamante and Jose Javier, however, stood firm on their testimonies.
Jose Javier, who had worked as court interpreter in the sala of the respondent for almost ten years, testified on the circumstances mentioned in the following affidavit:
1. During my stay with Branch 76, Quezon City, my extra work given to me by Honorable Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. is to bring the weekly allowance of Ms. Emma J. Castillo and to pay the monthly electric and water bills or the said Bliss located at Blg. 19-22 Apartment, Pag-asa, Quezon City where Ms. Emma J. Castillo is residing and also instructed me last May 25, 1989 to bring Ms. Emma J. Castillo to the Chinese General Hospital to give birth and further instructed me to fetch from the hospital Ms. Emma J. Castillo after having given birth to a Baby Boy named JEROME CHRISTOPHER CALANOG and also on February 1990 instructed me to secure educational plan for JEROME CHRISTOPHER CALANOG in the amount of P534.00 for first payment only.
2. In view of being a lay minister of Mary Immaculate Concepcion Parish Church at Pasig, Metro Manila who distributes Holy Communion during Holy Mass on Sundays, I considered to (sic) revolting to my conscience to be an errand boy by doing every now and then.[4]
xxx xxx xxx
In addition, the National Bureau of Investigation Intelligence Service, upon the instruction of this Court, carried out a discreet verification of the facts raised in the testimonies and furnished the following information:
xxx xxx xxx
On June 29, 1990 initial discreet verification disclosed that indeed EMMA J. CASTILLO resides at #19-22 Bliss Condominium, Pag-Asa, Q.C.,
xxx xxx xxx
It was further discreetly gathered at that time that EMMA J. CASTILLO, is the mistress of a Judge of a Quezon City Court; about 50 plus years old; always wearing long sleeve shirt.
Further initial discreet verification also revealed that EMMA J. CASTILLO has three children and that the youngest is still a baby.
On June 30,1990, it was discreetly gathered from Judge CALANOG's staff at Branch 76, RTC, Q.C., that subject CALANOG is scheduled to leave the country for China on a vacation.
On same day, from another source who is familiar with EMMA J. CASTILLO, it was discreetly gathered that EMMA J. CASTILLO is the mistress of a Judge of a Quezon City Court and has three children. Accordingly, this Judge has been frequently seen at EMMA J. CASTILLO's unit, especially during the afternoon and that when they go out, they walk separately, pretending not to know each other.
xxx xxx xxx
On the same day, it was discreetly verified from the National Housing Authority (NHA) that a Bliss Condominium #19-22 was originally awarded to one EVANGELINE JACINTO, who is an employee of NHA. JACINTO sold her rights to the said condominium unit to one Atty. CAMAYA who happens to be a close friend of subject CALANOG. Atty. CAMAYA's wife, MELY CAMAYA is also familiar with Subject CALANOG because she used to work at the RTC where Subject CALANOG is the judge. Atty. CAMAYA sold his Bliss Condominium unit #19-22 to Subject CALANOG. However, monthly amortization payments were made still under the name of EVANGELINE JACINTO. About a month ago, EMMA J. CASTILLO approached EVANGELINE JACINTO and requested the latter to sign an Absolute Deed of Sale for the said condominium unit #19-22 in her (Emma J. Castillo) favor. All the copies of said Absolute Deed of Sale are with EMMA J. CASTILLO. Per NHA records, Emm J. Castillo has not yet presented the said absolute deed of sale with NHA.
On 2 July 1990, a Barangay Census record (attached) was discreetly obtained where EMMA J. CASTILLO, in her own handwriting, listed the names of all her co-occupants in the said condominium unit. At the bottom of said list, Emma listed the names of her children, including JEROME CHRISTOPHER, born 27 May 1989. An opportunity arose where the child JEROME CHRISTOPHER was personally seen inside the said condominium unit.
On 2 July 1990, a Certified True Copy of the BIRTH CERTIFICATE of the child JEROME CHRISTOPHER was discreetly obtained from the National Statistics Office (attached). In this Birth Certificate, the surname of the child JEROME CHRISTOPHER is listed as CALANOG. Furthermore, in this Birth Certificate, the listed parents of the child JEROME CHRISTOPHER are EMMA J. CASTILLO as mother, and MANUEL M. CALANOG as father. EMMA J. CASTILLO gave birth at the Chinese General Hospital.[5]
xxx xxx xxx
Among the issues raised for our determination are:
1) Whether or not the "Affidavit of Desistance" has any effect on the continuation of the administrative case; and
2) Whether or not the circumstances shown are sufficient to convict the respondent judge for immorality and conduct unbecoming of a public official.
Generally, the Court attaches no persuasive value to affidavits of desistance, especially when executed as an afterthought, as in the case at bar.[6] As held in People v. Obina:
It would be a dangerous rule for courts to reject testimonies solemnly taken before the courts of justice simply because the witnesses who had given them later on changed their mind for one reason or another; for such rule would make solemn trials a mockery and place the investigation of truth at the mercy of unscrupulous witness.[7]
Even if Emma Castillo had not filed her "Affidavit of Desistance," we would not have been swayed solely by her allegations, and we find from the testimony of Jose Javier that the former's charges, indeed, rest on sufficient grounds.
As alleged by the complainant, verified by Justice Gloria C. Paras, and confirmed by Jose Javier and agents of the National Bureau or Investigation, Judge Calanog did establish an intimate, albeit immoral, relationship with complainant Emma Castillo although he, Judge Calanog, is a married man. Out of that liaison Emma Castillo gave birth to Judge Calanog's child, Jerome Christopher, whom he housed in a condominium unit together with his (Jerome's) mother and her two older children.
Judge Calanog has behaved in a manner not becoming of his robes and as a model or rectitude, betrayed the people's high expectations, and diminished the esteem in which they hold the judiciary in general.
It is of no import that the evidence on record is not sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt the facts of concubinage having indeed existed and been committed. This is not a criminal case for concubinage but an administrative matter that invokes the power of supervision of this Court over the members of the judiciary.
The circumstances show a lack of circumspection and delicadeza on the part of the respondent judge by failing to avoid situations that make him suspect to committing immorality and worse, having that suspicion confirmed.
Canon I states:
xxx xxx xxx
Rule 1.01 -- A judge should be the embodiment of competence, integrity, probity and independence.
The Court's Commentary on this Rule states:
The integrity and independence of the judiciary can be reduced to one common denominator: the judge--the individual who dispenses justice, and upon whose attributes depend the public perception of the judiciary.
Independence or the judiciary requires that the judge should be independent-minded, imbued with a sense of mission, a person of honor, integrity, courage and conviction.[8]
Under Rule 140, Immorality is classified under "Serious Charges". This means that the following sanction may be imposed:
Dismissal from the service with forfeiture of benefits (except accrued leaves) and disqualification from reinstatement or appointment to any public office including a government-owned or controlled corporation;[9]
The Code of Judicial Ethics mandates that the conduct of a judge must be free of a whiff of impropriety not only with respect to his performance of his judicial duties, but also to his behavior outside his sala and as a private individual. There is no dichotomy of morality: a public official is also judged by his private morals. The Code dictates that a judge, in order to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary, must behave with propriety at all times. As we have very recently explained, a judge's official life can not simply be detached or separated from his personal existence. Thus:
Being the subject of constant public scrutiny, a judge should freely and willingly accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.
A judge should personify judicial integrity and exemplify honest public service. The personal behavior of a judge, both in the performance of official duties and in private life should be above suspicion.[10]
Justice Gloria C. Paras of the Court of Appeals, the assigned investigator of this case, submitted on November 19, 1990 her report and recommendation the ultimate portions of which state:
xxx xxx xxx
The statements of the aforesaid witnesses, Ernesto Bustamante and Jose Javier confirm the amorous relationship between the respondent and the complainant. The Investigator is of the view that the respondent who is a married man, and a member of the judiciary and the incumbent President of the Philippine Judges Association, had committed immorality.
Exacting standards of morality and decency have been strictly adhered to and laid down by the Highest Court of the land in regard to those in the service of the judiciary and more specifically so when the malefactor is a judge (Sicat vs. Alcantara, 161 SCRA 284 [1988]). It need not be stated that the personal and official actuations of every member of the bench must be beyond reproach and above suspicion for the faith and confidence of the public in the administration of justice can not be maintained if a Judge who dispenses it is not equipped with the cardinal judicial virtue of moral integrity, and if he obtusely continues to commit an affront to public decency. The Supreme Court, in the case of Leynes vs. Veloso, 82 SCRA (1978), has also said: "A Judge suffers from moral obtuseness or has a weird notion of morality in public office when he labors under the delusion that he can be a judge and at the same time have a mistress in defiance of the mores and sense of morality of the community. The absence of criminal liability does not preclude disciplinary action by reason of his highly unconventional and censurable behaviour."
Concluding, the undersigned Investigator respectfully recommends that:
(1) The "Motion to Strike Out Testimony From The Records", filed by counsel for the complainant be DENIED; and
(2) respondent Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. be found guilty of immorality and be meted out the severest disciplinary action of Dismissal from the service with prejudice to appointment to any government position and forfeiture of retirement benefits, if any.
We have examined the entire record of the case vis-a-vis this report and recommendation and we are in full accord with them.
It is worth noting here that the respondent judge, in violating a judicial precept, has also committed a grave injustice upon the complainant, who had sought his assistance in expediting the intestate estate proceedings of her deceased common-law husband. The judge, who was in the first place, prohibited by the Code of Judicial Conduct[11] from intervening in a case in any court, took advantage of the complainant's helplessness and state of material deprivation and persuaded her to become his mistress. The exploitation of women becomes even more reprehensible when the offender commits the injustice by the brute force of his position of power and authority, as in this case.
WHEREFORE, the respondent Judge, the Hon. Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., is found guilty of IMMORALITY and is hereby DISMISSED from the roll of judges, with prejudice to his reinstatement or appointment to any public office including a government-owned or controlled corporation, and forfeiture of retirement benefits, if any. Let a copy of this resolution be included in his record and be served on all courts throughout the land.
SO ORDERED.Melencio-Herrera, Feliciano, Padilla, Bidin, Sarmiento, Griño-Aquino, and Regalado, JJ., concur.
Gutierrez, Jr., J., please see dissent.
Fernan, C.J., Narvasa, Cruz, and Medialdea, JJ., join Justice Gutierrez, Jr. in his dissent.
Paras and Davide, Jr., JJ., no part.
Gancayco, J., on leave.
[1] Rollo, 1.
[2] Id., 4.
[3] id., at 43.
[4] Id., at 48.
[5] Confidential Report of the NBI, Department of Justice, addressed to the Hon. Chief Justice Marcelo B. Fernan, dated July 5, 1990.
[6] PLDT v. NLRC, No. 74562, July 31, 1987, 152 SCRA 707; People v. Royo, No. 52038, May 31, 1982, 114 SCRA 309. See Bais v. Tugaoen, Adm. Matter No. 1294-MJ, March 23, 1979, 89 SCRA 109.
[7] 97 Phil. 515 cited in PLDT v. NLRC, supra, and People v. Galicia, No. L-39235, July 25, 1983, 123 SCRA 556.
[8] Code of Judicial Conduct, 1989
[9] Approved by the Resolution of the Court En Banc dated November 22, 1990.
[10] Commentaries on Canon 2.01, Code of Judicial Conduct, supra note 7.
[11] Canon 2, Rules 2.01, 2.03, 2.04.