EN BANC
[A.M. No. 98-1-32-RTC. July 29, 1998]
Re: Inhibition
of Judge Bienvenido R. Estrada, Regional Trial
Court, Branch 57, San Carlos City, Pangasinan, in Civil Case No.
SCC-1822
D E C I S I O N
MENDOZA, J.:
Judge Bienvenido
R. Estrada is judge of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 57 at San Carlos City,
Pangasinan. On April 22, 1996, he
inhibited himself from hearing and deciding Civil Case No. SCC-1822, entitled
“The Umengan Estate, represented by Dra. Salud G. Umengan v. Rural Bank of
Binmaley, et al.,” on the ground that he was a member of the Board of Directors
of the Rural Bank of Labrador, one of the respondents in that case.
In the
resolution of February 17, 1998, the Court, taking note of the aforesaid order
of inhibition, required Judge Bienvenido R. Estrada to explain why no
disciplinary sanction should be imposed on him for holding a position in the Rural
Bank of Labrador, even as it designated Judge Luis M. Fontanilla of the RTC,
Branch 42 at Dagupan City, to hear and decide Civil Case No. SCC-1822.
In his letter
dated March 13, 1998, Judge Estrada explains that:
[H]e has resigned [from] his membership in the Board
of Directors in the Rural Bank of Labrador effective May 31, 1997. Since then undersigned has not maintained
any position at the Rural Bank of Labrador.
This case was
referred to the Office of the Court Administrator which, on July 9, 1998,
submitted a report stating, among other things, the following:
. . . [T]he undersigned requested
information from the Administrative Office, Office of the Court Administrator
as to when Judge Estrada was appointed to the Judiciary. It was disclosed that he transferred to the
Judiciary on May 17, 1994 from another government office.
A perusal of the record shows
[that] Judge Bienvenido Estrada failed to comply with the directive of Circular
No. 6 dated April 10, 1987. The fact
that he has already resigned as a Member from the Directorship of the Rural
Bank of Labrador does not excuse him from any administrative liability. As a Judge he should be faithful to the law
and maintain professional competence.
The present controversy could have been avoided had he kept faith with
the injunction that as a member of the bench he must continuously keep himself
abreast of legal and jurisprudential developments because the learning process
in law never ceases (In Re: Comelec
Resolution No. 2521, A.M. 92-12-916 RTC, July 8, 1994).
In this instant case, assuming
without admitting that Judge Estrada acted in good faith in having himself
appointed as a member of the Board of Directors in the Rural Bank of Labrador
and that he has already resigned from the same, such considerations will simply
mitigate his administrative liabilities but will not altogether excuse his
ignorance of the law/circulars.
We find the
foregoing report to be well taken.
Circular No. 6 dated April 10, 1987 strictly enjoins all Judges, Clerks
of Court and Sheriffs not to accept the position of director or any other
position in any electric cooperative or other enterprises, or to resign
immediately from such position if they are already holding the same so as not
to prejudice the expeditious and proper administration of justice. In violation of this circular, Judge
Estrada, who was appointed to the judiciary on May 17, 1994, did not resign
from the Board of Directors of the Rural Bank of Labrador until May 31, 1997.
WHEREFORE, Judge Bienvenido R. Estrada is
hereby REPRIMANDED with the WARNING that repetition of the same or similar acts
for which he is being reprimanded will be dealt with more severely.
SO ORDERED.
Narvasa, C.J.,
Regalado, Davide, Jr., Romero, Bellosillo, Melo, Puno, Vitug, Kapunan,
Panganiban, Martinez, Quisumbing, and Purisima, JJ., concur.