EN BANC
[B.M. No. 3263. June 5, 2018.]
BELEN Y. YNTIG, complainant,vs. CESLEEN T. GABINETE, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court en banc issued a Resolution datedJUNE 5, 2018, which reads as follows: HTcADC
"B.M. No. 3263 (Belen Y. Yntig vs. Cesleen T. Gabinete). — For resolution by the Court is a letter-complaint dated August 19, 2016 of Belen Y. Yntig addressed to the Bar Confidant Atty. Ma. Cristina B. Layusa against respondent Cesleen T. Gabinete, appealing to the Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC) not to allow respondent to take the Bar Examinations of 2016. The letter-complaint charged Gabinete with alleged immoral conduct of maintaining an illicit relationship with Belen's husband prior to his death.
The Facts
The Office of the Bar Confidant (OBC), in its Report for Agenda dated August 3, 2017, summarized the facts, as follows:
Complainant stated that she is the widow of the late Mr. Jerome Yntig who died last March 11, 2014. They had four (4) children, all of whom are already of legal age.
She narrated that after her husband was buried, she began to collate all his personal belongings and found a scrapbook which, much to her surprise, contained details of his relationship with herein respondent CESLEEN T. GABINETE. Said scrapbook appears to have been made by respondent herself and was given to complainant's late husband as a gift. Among others, it contained love notes, boarding tickets of their vacation together as well as pictures of complainant's late husband with the respondent.
She added that among the documents she found were a Birth Certificate, an Admission Slip and Official Receipts issued by the University of San Carlos in favor of herein respondent. Upon verification, she discovered that said respondent just graduated from law school last March 2016 and was probably set to take the bar examinations.
Complainant advanced that anyone who involves herself romantically with a married man, such as the herein respondent, is outright immoral. Moreover, anyone who flaunts her relationship with a married man, without any regard whatsoever to the feelings of his family as well as that of the society, is even worse than immoral.
Given the questionable character of the respondent, she maintained that the same does not deserve to be an officer of the Court and hence, must not be allowed to take the bar examinations.
Respondent CESLEEN T. GABINETE x x x passed the 2016 Bar Examinations.
xxx xxx xxx
In her letter-comment dated 2 June 2017, respondent vehemently denied any romantic relationship with complainant's late husband x x x. And, while she considers [him] as an advisor and a good friend, they were not lovers, contrary to what the complainant wishes to make it appear. aScITE
Respondent stated that she came to know the late Mr. Jerome Yntig when she was still working as an Account Executive of the Aliw Broadcasting Company. Since her work required her to coordinate with client companies with regard to their product advertisements and promotions, she came to know Mr. Yntig who was then a representative of Globe Telecom.
She added that, as an advisor and a good friend, Mr. Yntig often gave her advice on how to further improve her marketing and leadership skills, her other talents as well as how to survive law school. And, since his work afforded him access to lawyers, Mr. Yntig even helped her in the correction of her name in her Birth Certificate.
She maintained, however, that her relationship with Mr. Yntig was purely on a professional level and without any malice, one based on friendship and respect.
Respondent likewise denied having made the scrapbook being referred to by the complainant. Being a Human Resource Officer, she said that she is very much aware of the risks of such inappropriate actions and would not do anything to jeopardize her employment as, well as her chances of becoming a full-[f]ledged lawyer.
She stated that she is an [active] member of the Church of Our King, a local church in Cebu City. x x x In November 2016, she received the Esperanza Award for initiating and participating in a number of community outreach programs for the less fortunate in Cebu City.
She averred that she invested countless time and resources in the study of law. She struggled to balance her work and her law studies as she had to work full time in order to sustain her law studies. For the bar examinations, she had to fly back and forth from Cebu to Manila then back to Cebu for the entire month of November.
Respondent expressed that the denial of her admission to the Philippine Bar is too harsh a punishment and would mean that all her efforts were for nothing. She begged the compassion of the Court to finally allow her to take her Lawyer's Oath and sign the Roll of Attorney's. 1 (emphasis supplied)
OBC Recommendation
The OBC, in its Report for Agenda dated August 3, 2017, recommended to further probe into the matter considering the documentary evidence presented by the complainant, viz.: HEITAD
IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, it is respectfully recommended that:
1) Respondent CESLEEN T. GABINETE's admission to the Philippine Bar be CONTINUED TO BE HELD IN ABEYANCE;
2) The [OBC] be DIRECTED to:
a. FURNISH respondent Gabinete with a copy of the letter-complaint dated 19 August 2016 with complete attachments;
b. FURNISH complainant Yntig with a copy of the letter-comment dated 2 June 2017 with complete attachments; and
3) Complainant BELEN Y. YNTIG be DIRECTED to file a REPLY to the respondent's letter-comment dated 2 June 2017, within [15] days from receipt hereof.
Respectfully submitted. 2
Accordingly, the Court En Banc issued a Resolution dated August 22, 2017, adopting the recommendation of the OBC.
In compliance with said Resolution, complainant filed her letter-reply on February 2, 2018 with the OBC, refuting all the defenses advanced by respondent. She insisted that she is convinced of the extra-marital affair between respondent and her deceased husband, even offering to submit the original scrapbook as well as the notes found therein if only to verify whether the handwriting matches with that of respondent. Ultimately, complainant maintained that respondent lacks the good moral character required for admission to the Philippine Bar.
The OBC issued another Report for Agenda dated February 28, 2018, directing respondent to file a Comment. The Court En Banc, in its March 20, 2018 Resolution, also adopted the said new OBC Report for Agenda.
The Court's Ruling
The Court deems it proper to dismiss the letter-complaint on the ground of mootness.
Procedurally, the letter-complaint is not verified pursuant to Section 1, Rule 139 of the Rules of Court. ATICcS
Moreover, it is clear from the letter of complainant that her request is not to allow respondent to take the 2016 Bar Examinations. It is undisputed that respondent had been already allowed by this Court to take the 2016 Bar Examinations and that she passed it the next year.
Ergo, the letter-request has been rendered moot by the taking of the 2016 Bar Examinations by respondent, without prejudice to the right of complainant to avail or institute any action relating to the subject matter of her letter.
WHEREFORE, the unverified letter-complaint against Cesleen T. Gabinete is hereby DISMISSED, without prejudice to the filing by complainant of any action relating to her August 19, 2016 letter-complaint. The Comment on the letter-reply per the March 20, 2018 En Banc Resolution is DISPENSED WITH." Peralta, J., on official leave. Tijam, J., on official business. (adv42)
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETAClerk of Court
Footnotes
1. OBC Report for Agenda dated August 3, 2017, pp. 1-3.
2.Id. at 3.