AM RTJ 90 447; (December, 1994) (Digest)
G.R. No. RTJ-90-447 December 16, 1994
Emma J. Castillo, complainant, vs. Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr., respondent.
FACTS
This administrative case involves a plea for judicial clemency by former Judge Manuel M. Calanog, Jr. of the Quezon City RTC. In a 1991 decision, the Court found Judge Calanog guilty of immorality and dismissed him from service with forfeiture of all retirement benefits and perpetual disqualification from holding any public office. His motion for reconsideration was denied, rendering the decision final.
Judge Calanog now files the present petition, not to seek reconsideration of the final judgment, but to plead for executive clemency and compassion. He argues that sufficient time has elapsed since his dismissal, that he has undergone moral reformation, and that he promises to uphold integrity. He cites his active involvement in religious and civic organizations as proof of his rehabilitation and submits supporting testimonials. He seeks to have his dismissal considered a mere resignation, the perpetual disqualification lifted, and the forfeiture of retirement benefits nullified.
ISSUE
Whether the penalty of perpetual disqualification from public office imposed on the dismissed judge should be lifted on grounds of judicial clemency.
RULING
Yes, the penalty of perpetual disqualification is lifted. The Court, while stern in disciplining judges to safeguard judicial integrity, recognizes the possibility of reformation. Clemency may be granted when moral regeneration is proven, considering the individual’s potential for future public service.
Here, the Court found Atty. Calanog’s plea meritorious. He demonstrated sincere repentance and presented substantial evidence of his reformation through active religious and civic engagements, supported by credible testimonials. The Court noted his relative youth (54 years old) and his previously productive four-year service as a judge, which indicated unused potential for public service. While a return to the judiciary was deemed not yet opportune, lifting the disqualification would allow his talents to be utilized in other areas of government. However, his request regarding retirement benefits was denied as he had not rendered sufficient service to be entitled to them. The decision to grant clemency, lifting only the disqualification, was an act of judicial compassion tempered by the circumstances of proven rehabilitation.