The SC on libel cases

Hole of Justice

by Peter G. Jimenea

My Libel Case

This refers to Criminal Case No. C-4493 for libel filed by Fraulen Cordero aka Palpal, et al, vs, Peter Jimenea et al, about an article citing him as the brain of bank hold-ups in the fourth and fifth districts of Iloilo. He filed the case at the Municipal Trial Court of Pototan, Iloilo. This is my only libel case ever since I started writing as a columnist.

  

Acting thereon, the respondent Judge conducted a preliminary investigation and thereafter issued on September 2, 1998 warrants for the arrest of the herein accused, fixing the bail at P10,000.00 each. 

Consequently, on September 8, 1998, we filed a petition for prohibition with prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction seeking to enjoin the respondent judge or any other officer from enforcing the assailed warrants of arrest.

On October 11, 1999, we filed an administrative case against the respondent Judge for "gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of judicial functions and authority and issuing patently illegal orders." 


We contended that under Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 4363, the respondent Judge neither has the authority to conduct a preliminary investigation nor to issue warrants for our arrest.


In his Comment dated December 23, 1999, ⁶ the respondent Judge admitted his mistake and explained that the same was his first libel case and that he issued the challenged warrants in good faith.


The judge said that he erroneously relied on a pamphlet of the Revised Penal Code quoting Article 360 which consisted only of four (4) paragraphs without any word on the conduct of a preliminary investigation. 


He also expressed that had his attention been earlier called by the parties, he could have easily rectified the mistake by recalling the warrants of arrest. He added that he had been sufficiently chastised by different issues of our newspaper which publicized his blunder.


The respondent judge stressed that except for this single honest mistake he had never brought dishonor to his family and to the court. For his lapse, he promised to keep himself updated on laws, as well as on jurisprudence and circulars of the Supreme Court. 

In its resolution. the SC states that ignorance of the law, which everyone is bound to know, excuses no one, certainly not judges. Ignorantia juris quod quisque scire tenetur non excusat.

The provisions of Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 4363, on the persons authorized to conduct preliminary investigation in libel cases is so elementary, not to know it constitutes gross ignorance of the law. 

In a Resolution dated April 10, 2002, the First Division docketed the case as a regular administrative matter and required the respondent judge to file his Comment. In respondent’s comment of September 12, 2002, he repleaded his previous comment of December 23, 1999.


Respondent judge also attached therein newspaper articles on the ruling of the Regional Trial Court in the prohibition case, which declared as void the preliminary investigation he conducted and the warrants of arrest he issued.


The Court found the respondent Judge therein who is neither a judge of the municipal court of the city or of the province, guilty of gross ignorance of law for conducting the preliminary investigation contrary to Article 360 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 4363.

In the case at bar, the judge of the Municipal Circuit Trial Court which is not a court in the cities of Iloilo province (Iloilo City and Passi City), nor a court in Iloilo City, had no authority to conduct a preliminary investigation and to issue the corresponding warrants of arrest.

My libel case was eventually dismissed at Branch 69, RTC Dumangas, Iloilo, after one year without hearing as the complainant failed to appear in Court since the filing of the case. I was cleared even before the SC handed down its Resolution of the case.