View full case

COL. DANILO E. LUBATON v. JUDGE MARY JOSEPHINE P. LAZARO

FACTS:

The case involves a Motion for Reconsideration filed by respondent Judge Mary Josephine P. Lazaro, seeking to overturn the resolution issued on April 16, 2012, which fined her for the undue delay in resolving a Motion to Dismiss in a civil case. The Court adopted the recommendations of the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) and declared respondent Judge administratively liable for the delay in resolving the motion.

In her Motion for Reconsideration, respondent Judge argued that she had not been provided with copies of supplemental complaints and that the delay was necessary and not undue.

The Court directed the opposing party to comment on the motion, but no comment was received. The Court rules that respondent Judge's right to due process should be respected as she was not furnished with copies of the supplemental complaints and therefore was not given the opportunity to respond to them.

The Court also finds that the OCA's treatment of the supplemental complaints as "supplemental" was legally unsustainable.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether respondent Judge's right to due process was violated by not being furnished copies of the supplemental complaints before the administrative investigation.

  2. Whether the OCA's treatment of the supplemental complaints as "supplemental complaints" was legally unsustainable.

RULING:

  1. Respondent Judge's right to due process was violated. She was not notified about the four supplemental complaints, nor furnished copies of them. This deprived her of the opportunity to respond to the charges and prepare for the investigation. The requirement of due process in administrative proceedings includes being informed of the charges and having the opportunity to be heard.

  2. The OCA's treatment of the supplemental complaints as "supplemental complaints" was legally unsustainable. The requirements for a valid administrative charge against a sitting Judge or Justice are found in Section 1, Rule 140 of the Rules of Court which does not provide for the concept of "supplemental complaints." The OCA should have treated all the complaints as one, allowing respondent Judge to have proper notice and opportunity to respond to all the allegations against her.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Right to due process in administrative proceedings includes being informed of the charges and having the opportunity to be heard.

  • Proper notice must be given to the respondent in an administrative investigation for them to have a reasonable opportunity to respond.

  • The concept of "supplemental complaints" in disciplinary proceedings against Judges and Justices is not legally sustainable. All complaints should be treated as one, to ensure the respondent's right to due process.