The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended that Judge Pamintuan be dismissed from the service with the additional penalty of forfeiture of all his retirement benefits and disqualification from re-employment in the government service, including government owned or controlled corporations, for Gross Ignorance of the Law and for violation of Canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
o A final judgment may no longer be modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law. Should judgment of lower courts – which may normally be subject to review by higher tribunals – become final and executory before, or without exhaustion of all recourse of appeal, they too become inviolable, impervious to modification.
· Judge Pamintuan was placed under preventive suspension pending resolution of the administrative case to stop him from committing further damage to the judiciary.
· Judge Pamintuan moved for reconsideration and eventually filed a Motion for Early Resolution of Motion for Reconsideration and to Submit the Case for Decision.
· Judge Pamintuan then sent a letter requesting for his backpay and benefits covering the period of his preventive suspension - denied for being premature and for lack of merit.
ISSUE: Whether or not Judge Pamintuan is guilty of Gross Ignorance of the Law
HELD: Judge Fernando Vil Pamintuan of the RTC of Baguio City, Branch 3, is DISMISSED from the service.
· Judge Pamintuan should have realized that the trial court did not rule on that point that the Golden Buddha is fake in its May 30, 1996 Order (even in its September 2, 1996 Order)
· Section 6, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct:
o SECTION 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall always conduct themselves in such manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
· The doctrine of immutability and unalterability of a final judgment has a two-fold purpose, to wit:
- to avoid delay in the administration of justice and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the discharge of judicial business
- to put an end to judicial controversies, at the risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why courts exist
Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended that Judge Pamintuan be dismissed from the service with the additional penalty of forfeiture of all his retirement benefits and disqualification from re-employment in the government service, including government owned or controlled corporations, for Gross Ignorance of the Law and for violation of Canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
o A final judgment may no longer be modified in any respect, even if the modification is meant to correct erroneous conclusions of fact or law. Should judgment of lower courts – which may normally be subject to review by higher tribunals – become final and executory before, or without exhaustion of all recourse of appeal, they too become inviolable, impervious to modification.
· Judge Pamintuan was placed under preventive suspension pending resolution of the administrative case to stop him from committing further damage to the judiciary.
· Judge Pamintuan moved for reconsideration and eventually filed a Motion for Early Resolution of Motion for Reconsideration and to Submit the Case for Decision.
· Judge Pamintuan then sent a letter requesting for his backpay and benefits covering the period of his preventive suspension - denied for being premature and for lack of merit
ISSUE: W/N Judge Pamintuan is guilty of Gross Ignorance of the Law
HELD: Judge Fernando Vil Pamintuan of the RTC of Baguio City, Branch 3, is DISMISSED from the service
· Judge Pamintuan should have realized that the trial court did not rule on that point that the Golden Buddha is fake in its May 30, 1996 Order (even in its September 2, 1996 Order)
· Section 6, Canon 4 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct:
o SECTION 6. Judges, like any other citizen, are entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly, but in exercising such rights, they shall always conduct themselves in such manner as to preserve the dignity of the judicial office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.
· The doctrine of immutability and inalterability of a final judgment has a two-fold purpose, to wit:
- to avoid delay in the administration of justice and thus, procedurally, to make orderly the discharge of judicial business
- to put an end to judicial controversies, at the risk of occasional errors, which is precisely why courts exist.
Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) recommended that Judge Pamintuan be dismissed from the service with the additional penalty of forfeiture of all his retirement benefits and disqualification from re-employment in the government service, including government owned or controlled corporations, for Gross Ignorance of the Law and for violation of Canon 4 of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
.tif)
