THIRD DIVISION
[A.M. No. MTJ-13-1820. September 9, 2013.][Formerly OCA IPI No. 11-2416-MTJ]
PERFECTO CONDE, complainant, vs. JUDGE DIOSCORO V. CONAG, 4TH MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, PLACER-CAWAYAN-ESPERANZA, PLACER, MASBATE, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated September 9, 2013, which reads as follows:
"A.M. No. MTJ-13-1820 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 11-2416-MTJ] (Perfecto Conde v. Judge Dioscoro Y. Conag, 4th Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Placer-Cawayan-Esperanza, Placer, Masbate). — Complainant Perfecto Conde filed a criminal action against Mario Aya-ay, et al. before the 4th Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Placer-Cawayan-Esperanza in Masbate in Criminal Cases 5438-E and 5439-E.
On April 27, 2009 respondent Judge Dioscoro V. Conag voluntarily inhibited himself from hearing the above cases on the ground that he and a party were relatives. On May 12, 2009 the Executive Judge issued an Order, rejecting Judge Conag's voluntary inhibition for the reason that relationship alone was not a ground for inhibition. This matter was taken up at the initial hearing of the cases but the parties said that they had no objection to Judge Conag's hearing the same. EcaDCI
On August 20, 2010, after hearing the evidence of the prosecution, Judge Conag issued a consolidated judgment, granting the demurrer to evidence of accused Aya-ay, et al. and dismissing the cases.
In a subsequent administrative action, complainant Conde claims that Judge Conag should have inhibited himself from the two cases. Judge Conag was a second cousin of complainant Conde's wife, Rosita, and, therefore, Conde and the judge were related by affinity within the sixth degree. Both Section 1, Rule 137 of the Revised Rules of Court and Rule 3.12, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct provide for mandatory disqualification of judges under such circumstance.
After investigation, the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) found evidence that Judge Conag violated Section 1, 1st par., Rule 137 of the Rules of Court in relation to Section 5 (f), Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct and recommended the imposition on him of a fine of P3,000.00 with a warning against a repetition of the offense. Further, the OCA recommended the annulment of the consolidated judgment that he rendered in Criminal Cases 5438-E and 5439-E and the retrial of the same.
The Court finds no basis for accepting the OCA's finding and recommendation. Actually, Judge Conag initially inhibited himself from hearing the cases on ground of relationship with a party. But, for some reason, the Executive Judge rejected the inhibition. The parties, including complainant Conde, were made aware of the situation yet they manifested, through counsel, that they had no objection to his hearing the cases as directed by the Executive Judge. aASEcH
Besides, Rule 3.13, Canon 3 of the Code of Judicial Conduct allows a judge to hear a case although he is related to a party provided both sides agree in writing that they do not pose any objection to his doing so. Here, although the parties did not express their conformity in writing, they did so in open court as reflected in the transcript of stenographic notes. Such transcript forms part of the official records of the case 1 and constitutes a faithful and true record of the proceedings. 2
Parenthetically, complainant Conde objected to Judge Conag's hearing the cases only after the latter had decided them against him. Evidently, he would not have filed this administrative action had the judge issued a judgment in his favor.
WHEREFORE, the Court ABSOLVES Judge Dioscoro V. Conag, 4th Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Placer-Cawayan-Esperanza, Placer, Masbate, of the present charge against him.
SO ORDERED." ETCcSa
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LUCITA ABJELINA SORIANODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.De Guzman v. Bagadiong, 350 Phil. 227, 233 (1998).
2.Jamsani-Rodriguez v. Ong, A.M. No. 08-19-SB-J, August 24, 2010, 628 SCRA 626, 651.