G.R. No. A.M. No. RTJ-92-904. December 7, 1993.
DR. NORBERT L. ALFONSO, complainant, vs. JUDGE MODESTO C. JUANSON, Branch 30, Regional Trial Court of Manila, respondent.

FACTS

Complainant Dr. Norbert L. Alfonso filed a sworn complaint charging respondent Judge Modesto C. Juanson with immorality and violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics for allegedly maintaining an illicit sexual relationship with complainant’s wife, Sol Dinglasan Alfonso. The complainant and Sol were married on December 10, 1988, and had three children. The complainant alleged that their married life was peaceful until he discovered the affair through a series of events: In February 1991, he received phone calls from the respondent’s wife, Mrs. Ceferina Juanson, who informed him of the affair and claimed to possess love letters from Sol to the respondent. The complainant initially dismissed these claims. On June 12, 1992, the complainant and Sol traveled to the United States for a vacation; Sol returned ahead on July 10, 1992. During the complainant’s absence, Mrs. Juanson contacted his father, Atty. Norberto Alfonso, and provided photocopies and later original copies of Sol’s alleged love letters to the respondent. Atty. Alfonso hired a private investigating agency, which conducted surveillance and observed Sol meeting with the respondent on July 11 and 17, 1992, at Unit 412-A Citihomes in Mandaluyong, Metro Manila, where they stayed for two to three hours each time. The agency also took photographs of them together. Upon confrontation on July 25, 1992, Sol initially denied the affair but later admitted to an illicit relationship with the respondent since late 1983. The complainant and Sol subsequently separated. The complainant also discovered overseas calls made by Sol to the respondent’s office while in the U.S. The respondent, in his comment, admitted knowing Sol in a professional capacity as her lawyer since 1987 but denied any illicit affair, claiming their meetings were for legal consultations. He asserted that the apartment was leased by a third party and that others were present during their meeting on July 11, 1992. The case was referred to Associate Justice Lourdes T. Jaguros of the Court of Appeals for investigation, who conducted hearings and submitted a report with findings of fact.

ISSUE

Whether respondent Judge Modesto C. Juanson is administratively liable for immorality and violation of the Code of Judicial Ethics based on the evidence presented.

RULING

Yes, the respondent is administratively liable. The Court found that the respondent violated the Code of Judicial Conduct and the Canons of Judicial Ethics. The evidence, including love letters and photographs from surveillance, established that the respondent and Sol were involved in an illicit affair. The respondent’s defense that he suffered from diabetes mellitus and prostatitis, which allegedly prevented sexual congress, was deemed self-serving and irrelevant, as immorality is not confined to sexual intercourse but includes conduct showing moral indifference and dissoluteness. Additionally, the respondent neglected his official duties by leaving his office during working hours to meet with Sol on July 17, 1992, violating rules on official time. The Court emphasized that a judge’s personal behavior must be beyond reproach and that the respondent’s actions tarnished the integrity of the judiciary. Accordingly, the respondent was fined Two Thousand Pesos (P2,000.00) and sternly warned that a repetition of similar acts would be dealt with more severely.