A.M. No. MTJ-16-1877. June 13, 2016. Moamar Pangandag, Complainant, vs. Presiding Judge Ottowa B. Abinal, 8th Municipal Circuit Trial Court in Mulondo, Maguing, Lumba-Bayabao, and Taraka, Lanao del Sur, Respondent.
FACTS

Complainant Moamar Pangandag was charged with Grave Threats before the Municipal Circuit Trial Court (MCTC) presided by Judge Ottowa B. Abinal. The Information alleged that Pangandag and others, moved by personal and political resentment, threatened private complainant Monaoray Abdullah and her companions by shouting and firing guns, saying they would kill them. Judge Abinal found probable cause and issued a warrant of arrest. However, fifteen days later, he voluntarily inhibited himself from the case, acknowledging that Abdullah was his niece. The case was transferred and later dismissed upon the private complainant’s desistance.
Pangandag filed this administrative complaint, alleging gross ignorance of the law and bias. He argued that the MCTC lacked jurisdiction because Grave Threats, as charged, carried the penalty of reclusion temporal, exceeding the MCTC’s six-year jurisdictional limit. He also contended that Judge Abinal should have been disqualified ab initio due to his relationship with the private complainant. In his defense, Judge Abinal asserted that the Information, lacking any allegation of a demand for money or imposition of a condition, charged only the second form of Grave Threats punishable by arresto mayor (maximum six months), within MCTC jurisdiction. He claimed his duty to determine probable cause and issue a warrant was ministerial and that he properly inhibited thereafter.

ISSUE

The issues are whether Judge Abinal is administratively liable for (1) taking cognizance of the criminal complaint allegedly beyond MCTC jurisdiction, and (2) acting on the case and issuing a warrant despite his relationship to the private complainant.

RULING

The Court, adopting the Office of the Court Administrator’s recommendation, ruled Judge Abinal was not administratively liable for lack of jurisdiction but was liable for violating the rules on disqualification. On the first issue, the Court found no gross ignorance. Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations in the Information. Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code prescribes arresto mayor for grave threats not made subject to a condition. The Information filed against Pangandag did not allege any demand or condition; it merely stated the accused threatened the victims. Judge Abinal, relying on this text, correctly believed the charge fell under the second form of Grave Threats with a penalty within the MCTC’s exclusive original jurisdiction over offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding six years. His interpretation was a permissible judicial error, not gross ignorance warranting administrative sanction.
On the second issue, the Court found Judge Abinal liable. Rule 137 of the Rules of Court and Section 5(c), Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct mandate disqualification if a judge is related to a party within the sixth degree of consanguinity. This rule aims to preserve public confidence in judicial impartiality. The Judge erred in claiming his actions regarding the warrant were merely ministerial. Under Section 6(b), Rule 112, a judge must personally examine the complainant and witnesses to determine probable cause and then exercise discretion on the necessity of arrest. This is a judicial, not ministerial, function. By participating in these proceedings despite his relationship to the private complainant, Judge Abinal failed to uphold the standard of impartiality. His subsequent voluntary inhibition did not cure the initial violation. For this infraction, the Court imposed a fine of P15,000.