G.R. No. A.M. No. MTJ-92-691. September 10, 1993.
Sulu Islamic Association of Masjid Lambayong, complainant, vs. Judge Nabdar J. Malik, Municipal Trial Court, Jolo, Sulu, respondent.

FACTS

On June 5, 1992, an administrative complaint was filed against Judge Nabdar J. Malik, Presiding Judge of the Municipal Trial Court in Jolo, Sulu, charging him with: (1) Nepotism for recommending the appointment of his nephew, Omar Kalim, and his niece-in-law, Hanina Kalim; (2) Graft and Corruption for using Omar Kalim to extort money from litigants, citing specific instances; and (3) Immorality for engaging in an adulterous relationship with another woman, with whom he has three children. Judge Malik denied the charges, alleging the complainants were fictitious and the charges fabricated. The Supreme Court referred the case to Judge Harun Ismael for investigation. During the investigation, affidavits were presented showing that the signatures of the named complainants were forgeries or that the persons were deceased before the complaint was filed. Judge Ismael’s report found that only the charge of nepotism held. Regarding graft and corruption, no hard evidence was adduced linking Judge Malik to the allegations, though there was a suggestion to transfer Omar Kalim due to appearances. Regarding immorality, the report noted that under Muslim Law, as codified in P.D. No. 1083 (Code of Muslim Personal Laws), marrying more than one wife is allowed provided the man can support them and deal justly; Judge Malik’s first wife consented and felt financially supported, and the penal laws on bigamy do not apply to marriages under Muslim Law. On the charge of nepotism, it was established that Judge Malik, on June 16, 1978, recommended the appointment of his nephew, Omar Kalim (son of his older sister), as Janitor, falsely certifying that Kalim was not related to him within the third degree by affinity or consanguinity. He issued another false certification in 1985 for Kalim’s promotion to Process Server. Kalim also falsely denied this relationship in his Personal Data Sheet. However, the appointment of Hanina Kalim (nee Hailidani) did not violate nepotism laws as she entered the service in 1973, before her marriage to Omar Kalim in 1982, which is exempt under the law.

ISSUE

Whether Judge Nabdar J. Malik is administratively liable for the charges of nepotism, graft and corruption, and immorality.

RULING

The Court found Judge Nabdar J. Malik GUILTY of nepotism, falsification, and violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. The charges of graft and corruption were not proven due to lack of hard evidence. The charge of immorality was not sustained as his second marriage was contracted under Muslim Law, which is allowed under P.D. No. 1083 and to which the penal laws on bigamy do not apply. However, his act of recommending the appointment of his nephew, Omar Kalim, and issuing false certifications to conceal their relationship within the third degree of consanguinity constituted a clear violation of the prohibition against nepotism under Section 59, Book V of the Administrative Code of 1987, and involved falsification. Omar Kalim was likewise found guilty of falsification and deceit. The Court ordered their DISMISSAL from the service, with prejudice to re-employment in the government, with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and privileges except earned leave credits. Judge Malik was ordered to cease and desist from his judicial functions immediately.