OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR vs JUDGE ELIZA B. YU, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 47, PASAY CITY [ AM No. MTJ-12-11!, No" 22, 2#1$ % FACTS& Judge Judge Eliza Eliza Yu’s Yu’s nonco noncompl mplian iance ce with with A.O. A.O. No. No. 19-2 19-211 11!! "e#us "e#usal al to hono" hono" the appoin appointme tments nts o# cou"t cou"t pe"son pe"sonnel nel!!
issuan issuance ce
o# a show-c show-caus ause e o"de o"de""
agains againstt #ellow #ellow Judges Judges and
cou"t cou"t
pe"son pe"sonnel nel!!
dis"espe dis"espect#ul ct#ul attitude towa"ds $% o##ice"s o##ice"s and o##ices! o##ices! o"de" o# p"esentati p"esentation on o# e& pa"te evidence evidence 'e#o" 'e#o"e e the O%A who was not a mem'e" mem'e" o# the (a"! "e#usal "e#usal to sign sign the applica applicatio tion n #o" leave leave o# a'sence! a'sence! inapp"op inapp"op"iate "iate messages messages to he" #ellow #ellow Judge! Judge! autho"izat autho"ization ion to allow c"iminal c"iminal p"oceedin p"oceedings gs without the actual pa"ticipation o# the pu'lic p"osecuto"! he" manne" o# disposing cases! and othe" allegations o# opp"essions "esulted to the seve"al complaints #iled against he". ISSUE& )*N dis'a"ment should also 'e imposed on the "espondent. RULING& +he #o"egoing #indings ma, al"ead, wa""ant Judge Yus dis'a"ment.
A.. No. 2-9-2-$%! dated $eptem'e" 1/! 22 "elevantl, states0 Some Some admini administr strati ative ve cas cases es agains againstt Justic Justices es of the Court Court of Appea Appeals ls and the Sandiganbayan; judges of regular and special courts; and court officials who are lawyers are based on grounds which are likewise grounds for the disciplinary action of members of the Bar for violation of the Lawyers !ath" the Code of #rofessional $esponsibility" and the Canons of #rofessional %thics" or for such other forms of breaches of conduct that have been traditionally recogni&ed as grounds for the discipline of lawyers'
In any of the foregoing instances, the administrative administrative case shall also be considered a disciplinary action against the respondent Justice, judge or court court offici official al concer concerned ned as a member member of the Bar. Bar. The The respon responden dentt may forthwith be required to comment on the complaint and show cause why he should should not also also be suspended suspended,, disbarred disbarred or otherwis otherwise e disciplin disciplinaril arily y
sanctioned aa member of the Bar. Judgment in both respects may be incorporated in one decision or resolution. nde" $ection 2/! ule 134 o# the $ules of Court ! an atto"ne, ma, 'e dis'a""ed on the g"ound o# '(o)) *+)o/0 and +3/ +)o5+55 o3 6 63/ o(5( o3 6 )/85(+o( o/(0 . 5iven he" wanton de#iance o# the %ou"ts own di"ectives! he" open dis"espect towa"ds he" #ellow 6udges! he" 'latant a'use o# the powe"s appu"tenant to he" 6udicial o##ice! and he" penchant #o" th"eatening the de#enseless with legal actions to ma7e them su'mit to he" will! we should also 'e imposing the penalt, o# +)6(*50. +he o'6ect o# +)6(*50 is not so much to punish the atto"ne, he"sel# as it is to sa#egua"d the administ"ation o# 6ustice! the cou"ts and the pu'lic #"om the misconduct o# o##ice"s o# the cou"t. Also! +)6(*50 see7s to "emove #"om the 8aw "o#ession atto"ne,s who have dis"ega"ded thei" 8aw,e"s Oath and the"e', p"oved themselves un#it to continue discha"ging the t"ust and "espect given to them as mem'e"s o# the (a".
+he administ"ative cha"ges against "espondent Judge Yu 'ased on g"ounds that we"e also g"ounds #o" disciplina", actions against mem'e"s o# the (a" could easil, 'e t"eated as 6usti#ia'le disciplina", initiatives against he" as a mem'e" o# the (a". +his t"eatment is e&plained ', the #act that he" mem'e"ship in the (a" was an integ"al aspect o# he" :uali#ication #o" 6udgeship. Also! he" mo"al and actual un#itness to "emain as a Judge! as #ound in these cases! "e#lected he" indeli'le un#itness to "emain as a mem'e" o# the (a". At the ve", least! a Judge li7e he" who diso'e,ed the 'asic "ules o# 6udicial conduct should not "emain as a mem'e" o# the (a" 'ecause she had the"e', also violated he" 8aw,e"s Oath.
;ndeed! "espondent Judge Yus violation o# the #undamental tenets o# 6udicial conduct em'odied in the (ew Code of Judicial Conduct for the #hilippine Judiciary would constitute a '"each o# the #ollowing canons0 1!
Ho5"5(, 09+) (/5 o3 3/)+' 095 +)*+))6 o3 6 J/'5 +09 +)6(*50 o5) o0 + 6 6 +)85)5 +09 o( )50 6)+5 095 (5)8o50:) (+'90 0o /5 8(o5)). A) )/9, 95( +)6(*50 6) 6 o33)9oo0 o3 A.M. No. #2-;-#2-SC +09o/0 (5
Judge Eliza (. Yu #iled a )otion for $econsideration with %*planation for the Show Cause !rder #iled vis-a-vis the decision p"omulgated on Novem'e" 22! 21<. On a"ch 1=! 21/! $% "uled0 Acco"dingl,! g"oss misconduct! violation o# the 8aw,e"s Oath! and will#ul diso'edience o# an, law#ul o"de" ', the %ou"t constitute g"ounds to dis'a" an atto"ne,. ;n the "espondents case! she was he"ein #ound to have committed all o# these g"ounds #o" dis'a"ment! wa""anting he" immediate dis'a"ment as a conse:uence. )e deem it wo"thwhile to "emind that the penalt, o# dis'a"ment 'eing he"e', imposed does not e:uate to st"ipping the "espondent o# the sou"ce o# he" livelihood. >is'a"ment is intended to p"otect the administ"ation o# 6ustice ', ensu"ing that those ta7ing pa"t in it as atto"ne,s should 'e competent! hono"a'le and "elia'le to ena'le the cou"ts and the clients the, se"ve to "ightl, "epose thei" con#idence in them.
