Accused move to quash libel case filed by Castro

The respondents in the libel case filed by assistant city prosecutor Mary Ann Castro have moved to quash the information of case, contending that "the facts charged do not constitute an offense."

Lawyer Vicente Fernandez II and businessman Nanak Yu, in their motion to quash the information, claimed that their statements, which Castro claimed were libelous, are considered privileged communication.

The statements were also included in the counter-affidavit on the complaint for malicious mischief that Castro filed against Yu and his brother, Jake.

The respondents reasoned out that the filing of the libel case is "premature and contemptuous" because the malicious mischief case filed by Castro against the Yu brothers is still pending before the Municipal Trial Court in Cities. But in opposing the motion, Castro said "the court cannot quash the case as such defense must be raised at trial where the prosecution is entitled to prove that there was malice in fact on the part of the accused."

Quoting a statement from the Supreme Court, Castro said: "Choice of language is an important requirement in the preparation of pleadings. In keeping with the dignity of the legal profession, a lawyer's language should likewise be dignified."

The alleged defamatory statements include the respondents' remark that Castro was a "congenital liar" and that she was like a "termagant fish vendor."

Castro also alleged that the respondents stated that her "short and provocative skirt" was comparable to someone "who openly peddles her flesh." - Liv G. Campo SC slaps P20T fine against erring judge To prove it would go after court judges who would notarize private documents, the first division of the Supreme Court presided by Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. slapped Judge Victorio Galapon Jr. with a fine of P20,000 coupled with a stern warning that a repetition of the same will be punished more severely.

Earlier, the Supreme Court warned court judges to refrain from notarizing private documents, except in areas where there are no available lawyers to perform such legal services.

Galapon, the presiding judge of the municipal trial court in Dulag town, Leyte was found by the High Tribunal guilty when he notarized a deed of absolute sale despite rules that prohibit judges from doing such in places where there are available notaries public.

The judge claimed that he was not the one who prepared the document and that his participation was limited only to its acknowledgment. For which the corresponding fee was collected by and paid to the clerk of court. According to Galapon, he was constrained to notarize the document because the only notary public in Dulag, Leyte was out of town that time and the vendor was compelled to go to him because the vendee was in a hurry.

But the SC has concurred with the recommendation of the Court Administrator saying that Galapon has exceeded his authority in acting as notary public ex-officio and notarizing private documents even if the place has a notary public.

The 1989 Code of Judicial Conduct not only enjoins judges to regulate their extra-judicial activities in order to minimize the risk of conflict with their judicial duties, but also prohibits them from engaging in the private practice of law.

The SC explained that "It is only when there are no lawyers or notaries public that the exception applies" but the fee for the notarial services should go to the government coffers. - Rene U. Borromeo