^{No jurisdiction, says Judge on Ombudsman} chanrobles virtual law library

However, Ombudsmans office says it will raffle Complaint filed by lawyer against judge chanrobles virtual law library

JUDGE Martin Ocampo of the Cebu Regional Trial Court (RTC) yesterday fumed over a news report about a complaint filed against him by a losing litigant, lawyer Elias Tan. chanrobles virtual law library

He said the Visayas Ombudsmans Office has no jurisdiction whatsoever to investigate graft charges against judges for alleged violations of judicial canons. chanrobles virtual law library

The complaint, however, will take the normal route of being raffled to a graft investigator for evaluation, according to Ombudsman Director Virginia Santiago. chanrobles virtual law library

If there is administrative liability involved, she told Sun-Star Daily, the results will be sent to the Supreme Court. If the investigator finds a criminal case, the anti-graft office will proceed to investigate, review and possibly prosecute it, depending on the approval of Ombudsman Aniano Desierto. chanrobles virtual law library

It will be evaluated first to determine if it is to be docketed as an administrative case or a criminal case, or both, Santiago said. chanrobles virtual law library

Judge Ocampo, in a letter to Sun-Star Daily, complained that the news report was libelous and damaging to his reputation. chanrobles virtual law library

He said the paper should have known better that the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate the case, only the Supreme Court. chanrobles virtual law library

The complaint on which the news report was based was filed with the Visayas Ombudsmans Office by Tan, a 64-year-old lawyer. chanrobles virtual law library

Sun-Star Daily delayed publication for one day to get the judges comment. He was quoted in the report as describing the case as pure harassment and part of the professional hazards of a judge. chanrobles virtual law library

Naturally, a losing party gets mad at the judge, Martin earlier said in an interview. chanrobles virtual law library

Tan, the complainant, is president of Millennium Industrial Commercial Corp., which was sued for foreclosure of mortgage by a stockholder. chanrobles virtual law library

The case was dismissed on July 12, 1996, but Judge Ocampo later granted a petition for relief from judgment when the stockholder, Jackson Tan, pointed to a mistake in that he had not received the certificate of stock worth P10 million from the company. chanrobles virtual law library

Elias Tan hit back by filing a complaint against the judge for violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, as amended, and for conduct unbecoming of a judge. chanrobles virtual law library

Tan cited Sec. 3(e) - Causing any undue injury to any party, or giving any private party, any unwarranted benefits, advantage, or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence. chanrobles virtual law library

On the matter of turf, Santiago affirmed that the anti-graft office has jurisdiction over the lawyers complaint under Republic Act 6770 or the Ombudsman Act of 1989. chanrobles virtual law library

Its not true (that we cant entertain complaints against judges). We can act on any complaints against all government officials even impeachment proceedings, she said. chanrobles virtual law library

Santiago added that the office recently recommended the filing of a criminal case against a judge. She gave no details but said the resolution is still with Ombudsman Desierto for approval. chanrobles virtual law library

Following the filing by respondent of its Answer to the Complaint as well as its Answer to Written Interrogatories posed by petitioner, the latter filed a Motion for Summary Judgment on October 22, 1997. During the hearing thereon, the parties agreed that the only issue for adjudication was whether or not the subject articles were attended by malice. They also agreed to submit their respective memoranda on the issue instead of going to trial. Accordingly, after the parties submitted their respective Memoranda, the case was deemed submitted for resolution. On April 20, 1998, the trial court dismissed petitioners Complaint, finding that there was no malice on the part of respondent in publishing the subject articles. chanrobles virtual law library

Hence, the instant Petition for Review on the sole issue of (W)hether or not on the basis of the facts admitted in the pleadings and Respondents affidavits submitted to the Court a quo Petitioner is entitled to a judgment for civil libel as a matter of law considering that only a preponderance of evidence is required to prove Respondents liability.³ chanrobles virtual law library

We find no merit in the instant Petition. chanrobles virtual law library

While the law presumes every defamatory imputation to be malicious, there are exceptions to this general rule, set forth in Article 354 of the Revised Penal Code, to wit chanrobles virtual law library

ART. 354. Requirement of publicity. Every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if it be true, if no good intention and justifiable motive for making it is shown, except in the following cases: chanrobles virtual law library

1. A private communication made by any person to another in the performance of any legal, moral or social duty; and chanrobles virtual law library

2. A fair and true report, made in good faith, without any comments or remarks, of any judicial, legislative or other official proceedings which are not of confidential nature, or of any statement, report or speech delivered in said proceedings, or of any other act performed by public officers in the exercise of their functions. chanrobles virtual law library

We agree with the lower court that the subject articles fall under the second exception for the following reasons: chanrobles virtual law library

First, the articles complained of are fair and true reports of a judicial/administrative proceeding, which is not confidential in nature. They quote directly from the affidavit-complaint filed before the Ombudsman. Indeed, a perusal of the first article would readily show that it merely reported the filing of graft charges against petitioner before the Office of the Ombudsman for the Visayas. In so reporting, the article quoted from the affidavit-complaint filed by the complainant lawyer, Elias Tan, and narrated the antecedent facts leading to the filing of the graft charges. On the other hand, the second article presented petitioners own reactions against the graft charges filed against him; with explanatory statements from Office of the Ombudsman Director Virginia Santiago refuting petitioners claims that the said office had no jurisdiction over graft charges against judges for alleged violations of judicial canons. chanrobles virtual law library

Second, there were no comments or remarks made by the reporter of private respondent in both instances. The articles were pure reports of the graft charges filed against petitioner. chanrobles virtual law library

Third, they were both fair reports. The fairness and balance exercised by private respondent is evident in the fact that petitioner was given a chance to air his side on the graft charges filed against him. In fact, before the first article was published, private respondents reporter took pains to interview petitioner on the matter; and his reactions were equally published in both articles. chanrobles virtual law library

Finally, the reports were also true accounts of a newsworthy event, the filing of graft charges against a local judge. It cannot be denied that petitioner did face graft raps at the Ombudsman as the complaint filed against him was for violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.⁴ Neither can the narration in the articles be denied as these were merely culled from the subject affidavit-complaint. chanrobles virtual law library

Petitioner cannot insist that the case against him is confidential in nature because it has already been ruled that complaints are public records which may be published as such unless the Court directs otherwise in the interest of morality or decency.⁵ Neither should the case of In Re: Abistado,⁶ relied upon by petitioner, be applied to the instant case since, unlike In Re: Abistado where the proceedings were on charges of malpractice against a lawyer which are confidential in nature, the charge filed before the Ombudsman against petitioner is not administrative in nature, such as to fall under the confidentiality rule of the Rules of Court, but criminal in nature, being a graft charge under Republic Act No. 3019. Unlike the proceedings in this Court, which expressly mandates that its disciplinary proceedings for lawyers and judges are confidential in nature, the Office of the Ombudsman has no such confidentiality rule. chanrobles virtual law library

On the other hand, the Rules of Procedure of the Ombudsman allows the Office of the Ombudsman to publicize in a fair and balanced manner the filing of a complaint before it, among others.⁷ chanrobles virtual law library

While the administrative nature of proceedings before us allows the protection of the personal and professional reputation of our colleagues in the profession of law and justice against baseless charges of disgruntled, vindictive and irresponsible clients and litigants, the criminal nature of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act does not allow the same protection to our brethren in the judiciary, who are placed on the same level, without distinction, as other government employees. Violations of this law partake of an infinitely more serious nature, touching as it does on what has been perceived to be an endemic social cancer eroding our system of government. It cannot be denied that this is a matter in which the public has a legitimate interest and as such, media must be free to report thereon.⁸ chanrobles virtual law library

We take judicial notice of the fact that petitioner Judge Martin A. Ocampo had already died. This, however, does not affect our decision to dismiss the instant Petition. chanrobles virtual law library

WHEREFORE, for the reasons aforestated, the Petition is hereby DISMISSED. chanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED. chanrobles virtual law library

Puno, Kapunan, and Pardo, JJ., concur. chanrobles virtual law library

Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), I vote to dismiss the petition because of the death of petitioner.