SECOND DIVISION
GERALDINE P.
DIZON,
Complainant,
A.M.
No.
P-04-1774
February 9, 2004
-versus-
HIYASMIN L. CAMPO,
COURT STENOGRAPHER,
MCTC - CAPAS, TARLAC,
Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
TINGA,
J.:
This case stemmed from
the Letter-Complaint[1]
dated March 5, 2002, filed by Geraldine P. Dizon against Hiyasmin L.
Campo,
Court Stenographer of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC), Capas,
Tarlac, for Immorality.
Complainant alleged
that respondent who is a single mother of a nine-year-old child was
having
an illicit relationship with her husband, Arnel T. Dizon. On March 3,
2001,
according to the complainant, her husband admitted his relationship
with
the respondent who was then already one month pregnant. She met with
respondent
in order to beg the latter to leave her husband and respondent answered
“I will” to the plea. However, respondent and complainant’s husband
continued
their illicit relationship still. On December 19, 2001, complainant
received
a text message from respondent that complainant’s husband loves her and
was willing to leave his family for her.[2]chanrobles virtual law library
On March 4, 2002, complainant
went to the MCTC of Capas, Tarlac, where she confronted respondent
about
the illicit relationship inside the chamber of Judge Panfilo Valdez,
Sr.
Respondent allegedly not only admitted her relationship with
complainant’s
husband but also stated that she was pregnant. Pleading to respondent
that
she leave her husband, complainant offered financial support.
Respondent
refused the offer, stating that she is working and that all she needs
is
complainant’s husband.[3]
Attached to the Letter-Complaint
was the Affidavit of Amelita Tanglao Dizon, the sister of Arnel T.
Dizon,
wherein she stated that she knew of the affair between her brother with
respondent as she often saw them together at the Municipal Hall where
she
is also working. Once during a heavy traffic, so she narrated, she
approached
and knocked on the car where Arnel and respondent were riding but the
two
ignored her.chanrobles virtual law library
Respondent filed a Comment[4]
dated March 15, 2002, denying the charges hurled against her. She
alleged
that complainant’s husband, a member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Capas,
Tarlac, became her acquaintance because of their common place of work.
Hence, it was not infrequent that she and Arnel would be seen talking
with
each other in public within the compound of the Municipal Hall. It was
only in the year 2001 that she found out that some employees attributed
malice to her acquaintance with Arnel Dizon. Respondent denied having
sent
text messages to complainant. She also denied that she was pregnant and
claimed she knew nothing about the alleged admission of Arnel on the
matter.
To prove the point she submitted a Medical Certificate dated May 5,
2002,
attesting to the fact that she did not get pregnant within the
preceding
three months.[5]
On August 7, 2002, the
Office of the Court Administrator recommended the dismissal of the
Complaint
for lack of merit.[6]
On August 15, 2002,
complainant filed a Motion to Admit Additional Evidence[7]
attaching thereto a Certification[8]
dated August 9, 2002, from the Civil Registrar confirming the marriage
that took place on May 28, 2002, between Arnel T. Dizon and respondent.cralaw:red
On October 15, 2002,
complainant filed another Motion to Admit Additional Evidence[9]
dated October 4, 2002, attaching thereto the Application for Marriage
License
dated May 17, 2002, of respondent and Arnel.cralaw:red
On November 8, 2002,
the OCA[10]
referred the case to the Executive Judge of the Regional Trial Court of
Tarlac City, for investigation, report and recommendation.cralaw:red
Respondent filed a Manifestation
with Motion for Reconsideration[11]
dated February 5, 2003, praying that she be allowed to resign effective
as of June 2003. She claimed that several months after the filing of
the
Administrative Complaint, she decided to ask the indulgence of the OCA
to allow her to resign even though, as she claimed, she was an
effective
and efficient Court Stenographer. The recommendation of the OCA
allowing
her resignation was simply noted pending the submission of the report
of
the Investigating Judge.chanrobles virtual law library
In his Report, Investigating
Judge Arsenio P. Adriano, Executive Judge, RTC, Branch 63, Tarlac City,
recommended that respondent be meted the penalty of three (3) months
suspension
without pay for immoral conduct. He based his recommendation on the
following
findings, thus:
“Respondent
admitted that Arnel T. Dizon courted her. Even when the administrative
case had already been filed, she was made to believe by Arnel T. Dizon
that he was not lawfully married and has, in fact, separated from
complainant
Geraldine Dizon.
Respondent further
admitted
that since she relied on Arnel Dizon’s allegations that he was not
legally
married, respondent signed an application for marriage license and, in
fact, signed a marriage contract with Arnel Dizon.
Respondent is tall
and
pretty and it is not difficult to accept her explanation that Arnel
Dizon
courted her and was able to convince her that he (Arnel) was not
legally
married to complainant Geraldine Dizon. It was only later on that she
came
to her senses and realized that she could not be happy with Arnel Dizon
as he has (sic) already two children. The respondent filed an annulment
suit before the RTC at Mabalacat, Pampanga.
Respondent further
alleged
that she filed a letter to the Honorable Supreme Court begging that she
be allowed instead to resign as Court Stenographer. Even assuming that
she be allowed to resign, this will not abate the progress of this
administrative
case.
But then, the
respondent
has shown remorse for what she had done. She had filed an annulment
suit
to annul her marriage with Arnel Dizon. There is really no evidence
that
when she had or when started her relationship with Arnel Dizon, that
she
was fully aware that Arnel Dizon was married (lawfully or illegally)
with
complainant Geraldine Dizon.
RECOMMENDATION:
It appearing that
this
is her first offense, and that the alleged relationship was not
entirely
her fault, it is most respectfully recommended that she be meted the
penalty
of three (3) months suspension without pay for immoral conduct instead
of suspension of six months and one day under Memorandum Circular No.
30
of the Civil Service Commission, dated 20 July 1989.”chanrobles virtual law library
The OCA agreed with the
penalty recommended by the investigating judge which is three (3)
months’
suspension without pay, which is not even the minimum of six (6) months
and one (1) day of suspension provided in Memorandum Circular No. 30
dated
July 20, 1989.
The Court affirms the
findings of immorality on the part of the respondent reached by the OCA
and the investigating judge. However, the penalty they recommended is
lower
than what respondent deserves.cralaw:red
The facts on record
warrant the imposition of the penalty of suspension prescribed by the Civil
Service law[12]
for the first offense for disgraceful and immoral conduct, the minimum
of which is six (6) months and one (1) day while the maximum is one (1)
year.chanrobles virtual law library
Instead of rectifying
her errant ways after the wife of her paramour had pleaded with her,
she
continued the illicit relationship and even abhorrently aggravated the
situation by marrying complainant’s husband. Interestingly, respondent
married him after she stated in her Comment that her relationship with
him was purely based on friendship. Respondent cannot feign ignorance
of
Arnel T. Dizon’s marital status for he was then a member of the
Sangguniang
Bayan of Capas, Tarlac. Someone like respondent who works in the same
Municipal
Hall must have known of, or at least could have easily verified, the
status
of Arnel. Even assuming that she was unaware of Arnel’s married status
when they first became acquainted with each other, she should have been
put on guard when a woman claiming to be his wife pleaded to her to
abort
her illicit relationship for the sake of the couple’s two children.cralaw:red
By agreeing to marry
a man during the subsistence of the latter’s marriage to another
person,
respondent subjected both herself and her paramour to the risk of
criminal
prosecution. Also, while it appears that Arnel had courted respondent,
the fact remains that she entertained the advances of a married man.
Respondent’s
subsequent filing of an action for the annulment of her marriage to
Arnel
does not extenuate her liability.cralaw:red
WHEREFORE, the Court
finds respondent HIYASMIN L. CAMPO GUILTY of immorality and hereby
imposes
upon her the penalty of suspension for six (6) months and one (1) day
without
pay. Let a copy of this Decision be appended to respondent’s 201 file.cralaw:red
SO ORDERED.cralaw:red
Puno, J., (Chairman), Quisumbing,
Austria-Martinez, and Callejo, Sr., JJ.,
concur.
____________________________
Endnotes:
[1]
Rollo.p. 1.
[2]
lbid.chanrobles virtual law library
[3]
Ibid.chanrobles virtual law library
[4]
Id., at 10-12.
[5]
Id., at 13.chanrobles virtual law library
[6]
Id., at 16-18.
[7]
Id., at 19.chanrobles virtual law library
[8]
Id., at 20.
[9]
Id., at 27.
[10]
Id., at 24.
[11]
Second Rollo, pp. 1-2.chanrobles virtual law library
[12]
Memorandum Circular No. 30, Series of 1989 of the Civil Service
Commission;
Section 23(o) of Rule XIV of the Rules Implementing Book V of the
Administrative
Code of 1987. |