EN BANC
[A.M. No. 17-07-07-SC. November 28, 2017.]
RE: LETTER OF STUART J. GREEN REQUESTING THAT AN INVESTIGATION BE CONDUCTED ON THE ALLEGED ILLEGAL MEDDLING BY ATTY. MA. LOURDES C. PERFECTO, DIVISION CLERK OF COURT, SECOND DIVISION, INTO THE JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS IN THE CASE OF LLOYD GONZAGA
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution datedNOVEMBER 28, 2017, which reads as follows: HTcADC
"A.M. No. 17-07-07-SC (Re: Letter of Stuart J. Green Requesting that an Investigation be Conducted on the Alleged Illegal Meddling by Atty. Ma. Lourdes C. Perfecto, Division Clerk of Court, Second Division, into the Judicial Proceedings in the case of Lloyd Gonzaga). — For resolution is the undated letter submitted by Stuart J. Green ("Mr. Green"), reporting the alleged unethical and illegal meddling into judicial proceedings by Second Division Clerk of Court, Atty. Lourdes Perfecto ("Atty. Perfecto"), praying that an investigation be conducted on the matter. Subsequently, this Court received a verified letter-complaint dated August 4, 2017 from Myla Corazon C. Mascariñas, reiterating the same set of allegations as Mr. Green's undated letter.
The Facts
In the undated letter, Mr. Green states that he had lost his wife, Atty. Mia Manuelita C. Mascariñas-Green, during an ambush done on February 15, 2017 by suspected assailants Lloyd Lancer S. Gonzaga ("Gonzaga"), Romarico T. Benegian, and several others, where she received nine bullets to her head causing her death. Several cases for murder and multiple attempted murder were filed against Gonzaga before various courts in Bohol and are still pending. However, Gonzaga remains to be at large and has evaded the court's jurisdiction despite the issuance of several warrants of arrest against him and his co-conspirators.
Mr. Green claims that Gonzaga had been "namedropping" certain personalities whom he claimed make him immune and invulnerable to accountability for his crimes. Based on reports, Mr. Green is alarmed that there are "relatives and friends of the murderers" who "happen to be in the echelons of the judiciary" who have been unduly interfering with the pending cases against the assailants.
It appears that Mr. Green had allegedly received information that Atty. Perfecto had been illegally and unethically meddling in the cases against Gonzaga. According to Mr. Green, Gonzaga had always bragged before the Bohol legal and judicial community about his close relationship to Atty. Perfecto. Gonzaga would allegedly brag that Atty. Perfecto was the guest of honor in parties that he would host at his resort in Alona Embrace in Panglao, Bohol where he would invite judges and the "who's who" of the judiciary in Bohol.
Pursuant to this Court's Resolution dated July 25, 2017, Atty. Perfecto submitted her Comment on the Undated Letter of Stuart J. Green dated August 11, 2017.
In her Comment, Atty. Perfecto admitted to knowing Gonzaga through his parents, Spouses Leopoldo and Teresita S. Gonzaga, who are the former's childhood friends. Atty. Perfecto also admitted to having knowledge of the criminal cases pending before the various courts and in the prosecutor's office in Bohol against Gonzaga, through his parents and through the mass media. While she denies being related to Gonzaga by blood or by affinity, she admits to having stood as his godmother on his wedding to Monica Blomqvist.
On the allegation of Gonzaga's namedropping and bragging, Atty. Perfecto asserts that she is neither privy to nor has control of Gonzaga's actions and that to hear such unsubstantiated allegations alone would be to unduly deprive her of due process. She argues that she cannot and should not be held responsible for whatever declarations that Gonzaga may have given at any time and circumstance since "she is not his keeper."
Atty. Perfecto claims that her name has been offensively dragged in the cases involving Gonzaga, over which she has no power or influence. She further states that she has no control over the misplaced perceptions of Mr. Green or the alleged boastful acts of Gonzaga and to hold her accountable for these extraneous acts beyond her control would be to punish her for something that she never did.
Moreover, Atty. Perfecto points out that her position as Division Clerk of Court does not give her any authority or power to influence or administratively supervise lower court magistrates. She further argues that there was no instance where she used her position to call the Judges or staff of the various courts in Bohol where the cases are pending to influence them in any way. She also did not contact the Court Administrator or any of the Deputy Court Administrators and their respective staff, or any official or personnel of this Court. She has never influenced or manipulated any of the officials of the Court for a favorable decision or outcome of the cases. Thus, Mr. Green's allegations are bereft of any truth or merit.
Atty. Perfecto also denies Mr. Green's claim that she was the guest of honor during parties hosted by Gonzaga in the latter's resort in Panglao, Bohol since she has neither attended any parties hosted by Gonzaga nor ever been to the said place as a guest or a paying guest. aScITE
Finally, Atty. Perfecto states that Mr. Green, in accusing her of "meddling" in behalf of Gonzaga, casts doubt and uncertainty upon the Judicial System since such accusations which debase her integrity and independence were made without an iota of evidence.
The Issue
The only issue for resolution in this case is whether or not there is merit in the letter-complaint filed by complainants.
The Court's Ruling
We rule to dismiss the complaint for lack of merit.
We find that there is insufficient evidence to conduct an investigation on the allegations made against Atty. Perfecto, much less find her administratively liable for the accusations made by Mr. Green or his substitute, Myla Corazon C. Mascariñas.
In Alcuizar v. Carpio, 1 We held:
We start off with the matter of proof. In administrative or disciplinary proceedings, the burden of proving the allegations in the complaint rests on the complainant. While substantial evidence would ordinarily suffice to support a finding of guilt, the rule is a bit different where the proceedings involve judges charged with grave offense. Administrative proceedings against judges are, by nature, highly penal in character and are to be governed by the rules applicable to criminal cases. The quantum of proof required to support the administrative charges or to establish the ground/s for the removal of a judicial officer should thus be more than substantial; they must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. x x x.
From the records on hand, We find that complainants' accusations have not been supported by substantial evidence except for self-serving allegations and hearsay. The documentary evidence submitted by complainants merely supports the claim that criminal cases have been filed against Gonzaga. However, none of these pieces of evidence establishes the accusation that Atty. Perfecto acted in any inappropriate manner to the effect that she had interfered, meddled, or influenced the said cases in any way. Complainants failed to submit any evidence, testimonial or otherwise, to corroborate such claims. Moreover, the statements made by complainants are clearly based on hearsay and suppositions which cannot be the basis of any administrative investigation or sanction.
In Samahan ng mga Babae sa Hudikatura (SAMABAHU) v. Judge Cesar O. Untalan, Regional Trial Court, Branch 149, Makati City, 2 We held:
Administrative complaints against members of the judiciary are viewed by this Court with utmost care, for proceedings of this nature affect not only the reputation of the respondents concerned, but the integrity of the entire judiciary as well. Considering that the complainants failed to present substantial evidence to prove the alleged sexual advances committed against them by respondent, elementary justice dictates that he be exonerated from the said charge.
Accordingly, We find no merit in the instant complaint against Atty. Perfecto.
WHEREFORE, the letter-complaint filed by Stuart J. Green, as substituted by his sister-in-law, Myla Corazon C. Mascariñas, against Second Division Clerk of Court Atty. Lourdes C. Perfecto is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit." Perlas-Bernabe, J., on leave. (11)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) FELIPA B. ANAMAClerk of Court
Footnotes
1. A.M. RTJ-07-2068 (Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 03-1854-RTJ), August 7, 2007, 529 SCRA 216, 225.
2. A.M. No. RTJ-13-2363 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 13-4149-RTJ), February 25, 2015.