ANTONIO M. LORENZANA vs. JUDGE MA. CECILIA I. AUSTRIA, Regional Trial Court, Branch 2, Batangas City, A.M. No. RTJ-09-2200, April 2, 2014 (formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 08-2834-RTJ)
“x x x.
On the Ground of Conduct
Unbecoming of a Judge
Unbecoming of a Judge
On the allegation of conduct unbecoming of a judge, Section
6, Canon 6 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct states that:
SECTION 6. Judges shall maintain order and decorum in all
proceedings before the court and be patient, dignified and courteous in
relation to litigants, witnesses, lawyers and others with whom the judge deals
in an official capacity. Judges shall require similar conduct of legal
representatives, court staff and others subject to their influence, direction
or control.39
A judge should always conduct himself in a manner that would
preserve the dignity, independence and respect for himself/herself, the Court
and the Judiciary as a whole. He must exhibit the hallmark judicial temperament
of utmost sobriety and self-restraint.40He should choose his words and exercise more
caution and control in expressing himself. In other words, a judge should
possess the virtue of gravitas.41
As held in De la Cruz (Concerned Citizen of Legazpi City) v.
Judge Carretas,42 a judge should be considerate,
courteous and civil to all persons who come to his court; he should always keep
his passion guarded. He can never allow it to run loose and overcome his
reason. Furthermore, a magistrate should not descend to the level of a
sharp-tongued, ill-mannered petty tyrant by uttering harsh words, snide remarks
and sarcastic comments.
Similarly in Attys. Guanzon and Montesino v. Judge Rufon,43 the Court declared that "although
respondent judge may attribute his intemperate language to human frailty, his
noble position in the bench nevertheless demands from him courteous speech in
and out of court.
Judges are required to always be temperate, patient and
courteous, both in conduct and in language."
Accordingly, the respondent’s unnecessary bickering with
SCP’s legal counsel, her expressions of exasperation over trivial procedural
and negligible lapses, her snide remarks, as well as her condescending
attitude, are conduct that the Court cannot allow. They are displays of
arrogance and air of superiority that the Code abhors.
Records and transcripts of the proceedings bear out that the
respondent failed to observe judicial temperament and to conduct herself
irreproachably. She also failed to maintain the decorum required by the Code
and to use temperate language befitting a magistrate. "As a judge, [she]
should ensure that [her] conduct is always above reproach and perceived to be
so by a reasonable observer. [She] must never show conceit or even an appearance
thereof, or any kind of impropriety."44
Section 1, Canon 2 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct
states that:
SECTION 1. Judges shall ensure that not only is their conduct
above reproach, but that it is perceived to be so in the view of a reasonable
observer.
In these lights, the respondent exhibited conduct unbecoming
of a judge and thus violated Section 6, Canon 6 and Section 1, Canon 2 of the
New Code of Judicial Conduct.
X x x.”