View full case

JOCELYN TALENS-DABON v. JUDGE HERMIN E. ARCEO

FACTS:

Jocelyn C. Talens-Dabon, Clerk of Court V of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of San Fernando Pampanga, filed a complaint against Judge Hermin E. Arceo, the Executive Judge of the same court, charging him with gross misconduct and immorality. The complaint alleged that Judge Arceo exhibited rude behavior, used offensive language, and made negative comments about court personnel. Talens-Dabon also accused Judge Arceo of making bodily contact with her and certain female employees, as well as kissing her on the cheek. The investigation revealed that Judge Arceo had shown explicit sex scenes from a VHS tape and a picture depicting figures in a coital position to the court employees. Marilyn Senapilo-Leander, a stenographer, testified that Judge Arceo wrote a love poem to her and dictated love letters or poems to her in his chamber.

In a separate case, Marilyn Leander, a utility worker in the Regional Trial Court, alleged that Judge Arceo had sexually harassed her. She provided various incidents as evidence, such as the respondent dictating love letters and poems to her, kissing her, staring at her lower parts, and making body contacts. Leander did not file a complaint earlier due to fear of retribution. In one incident, she found a handwritten poem from the respondent inside her office. The respondent approached her, asked for a kiss, and attempted to embrace and kiss her. The complainant resisted and tried to escape through the open windows but was interrupted before reaching them.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the poem written by the respondent was obscene and malicious.

  2. Whether the respondent committed sexual harassment and assault towards the complainant.

  3. Whether there is sufficient evidence to prove that the respondent committed the acts complained of, particularly the violent kissing incident.

  4. Whether the complainant and her witnesses are credible and have no ulterior motive or bias.

  5. Whether the respondent's denials can prevail over the weight and probative value of the complainant's assertions.

  6. Whether the respondent's poem serves as documented proof of his sexual intentions towards the complainant.

  7. Whether it is believable that the complainant would fabricate a story with severe implications on the respondent's professional and personal life just to get even for a simple scolding incident.

  8. Whether the respondent's actions have tempted the morals of the complainant and the other court employees he had power and influence over as the Executive Judge.

  9. Whether the respondent judge behaved in a manner unbecoming of a judge and model of moral uprightness.

  10. Whether the respondent judge's acts have damaged the integrity of the judiciary and created distrust in the system.

  11. Whether the respondent judge should be dismissed from the service as a disciplinary sanction.

  12. Whether or not Judge Hermin E. Arceo should be dismissed from the service for gross misconduct and immorality prejudicial to the best interests of the service.

RULING:

  1. The poem was found to be obscene and malicious, particularly the line that mentioned the complainant being unable to be intimate with the respondent because the complainant did not want to. The court stated that the poem was improper and unbecoming of a judge. The respondent, as a public official, should have exercised more prudence and restraint in his actions and words.

  2. The respondent was found guilty of committing sexual harassment and assault towards the complainant. The court believed the testimonies of the complainant and the witnesses corroborating her account. The respondent's behavior, as described by the complainant, constituted an act of sexual harassment, as well as physical assault, when he forcefully embraced and tried to kiss the complainant against her will.

  3. The Court adopts the findings and recommendations of the Investigating Justice and agrees that the respondent should be dismissed from the service with prejudice to re-appointment in any other government position and with forfeiture of all benefits and privileges, if any.

  4. The respondent judge behaved in a manner unbecoming of a judge and model of moral uprightness. His lewd and lustful acts have damaged the integrity of the judiciary and created distrust in the system. As a disciplinary sanction, he should be dismissed from the service.

  5. Judge Hermin E. Arceo is hereby DISMISSED from the service for gross misconduct and immorality prejudicial to the best interests of the service, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and with prejudice to re-employment in any branch of the government, including government-owned and controlled corporations.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Public officials, especially judges, should conduct themselves with utmost propriety and should avoid any actions or words that may tarnish the dignity of their position.

  • Sexual harassment includes any unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature that creates an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment.

  • Consent is crucial in any form of physical contact, and any act without consent may constitute assault or battery.

  • The integrity of the Judiciary is not only determined by its ability to administer justice but also by the perception and confidence of the community that justice is served.

  • The weight and probative value of assertions should be considered in evaluating the credibility of witnesses.

  • Documented evidence, such as a poem, can be used to support allegations and prove intent.

  • The court considers the background and motives of the parties involved in evaluating the believability of their testimonies.

  • Actions that tempt the morals of individuals under one's power and influence can be a ground for dismissal from the service.

  • Judges must possess the highest integrity, probity, and unquestionable moral uprightness.

  • Judges should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities.

  • Judges should behave at all times to promote public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

  • Moral integrity is a necessity in the judiciary.

  • A judge's official life cannot be detached or separated from his personal existence.

  • Judges should be the embodiment of competence, integrity, and independence.

  • The conduct of a judge must be free of a whiff of impropriety not only in his performance of judicial duties but also as a private individual.

  • A judge's personal behavior, both in the performance of official duties and in private life, should be above suspicion.

  • A judge's actuations may be judged not only by his official acts but also by his private morals, to the extent that such private morals are externalized.

  • Judges should freely and willingly accept restrictions on conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen.

  • Judges should personify integrity and exemplify honest public service.

  • Judges should not take advantage of their position and power to carry out lustful and lascivious desires.

  • Judges should not behave in a manner that damages the integrity of the judiciary and creates distrust in the system.

  • The severest form of disciplinary sanction for a judge who behaves in an unbecoming manner is dismissal from the service.

  • Judges are expected to conduct themselves strictly in accordance with existing laws and the Code of Judicial Ethics.

  • Judges should be exemplars in the communities and the living personification of justice and the Rule of Law.