View full case

ATTYS. ROWENA V. GUANZON v. JUDGE ANASTACIO C. RUFON

FACTS:

Complainants Atty. Rowena V. Guanzon and Atty. Pearl R. Montesino, Assistant City Prosecutor Rosanna Saril-Toledano, Bacolod City, and Atty. Erfe del Castillo-Caldit filed a complaint against respondent Judge Anastacio C. Rufon of the Regional Trial Court for violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Rule on Gender-Fair Language, use of foul, obscene and discriminatory language, discrimination against women lawyers and litigants, and unethical conduct. Respondent judge denied the charges. The case was referred to Justice Rebecca De Guia-Salvador of the Court of Appeals for investigation. Due to the parties' inability to attend subsequent hearings, the case was resolved based on their pleadings and documents. The complainants alleged that the respondent judge made inappropriate and insulting remarks towards one of the complainants in open court. The respondent judge contested the allegations and admitted to the use of "frank language" in court while exhorting litigants to settle their differences. Complainant Caldit withdrew her complaint against the respondent.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether or not there is sufficient cause to hold the respondent judge administratively liable for violation of the Code of Conduct for Judges and the Rule on Gender-Fair Language, use of foul or obscene and discriminatory language, discrimination against women lawyers and litigants, and unethical conduct.

RULING:

  1. The Court sustains the finding of Justice Salvador that the respondent judge uttered intemperate and obscene language injurious to the sensitivity and feelings of the complainants. The Court emphasized that judicial decorum requires a magistrate to be temperate in language and refrain from inflammatory or excessive rhetoric. The respondent judge's noble position in the bench demands courteous speech in and out of the court. The Court found the respondent judge guilty of vulgar and unbecoming conduct, which is considered a light charge under the Revised Rules of Court. The respondent judge is fined in the amount of P5,000.00 and warned that a repetition of a similar offense in the future will be dealt with more severely.