8/13/2019 Liwanag vs Judge Lustre

1/3

LIWANAG vs JUDGE LUSTRE

AM No. MTJ-98-1168, April 21, 1999

FACTS

Complainants husband, Jose Zafra, files twelve counts of violationof BP ! The Assistant Provincial Prosecutor filed twelveinformations for violation of BP which was assi"ned at the #TCpresided b$ Jud"e %ustre, herein respondent! After the informationswere filed, the accused posted bail! &owever, their arrai"nmentwere postponed several times at the instance of the accused!Complainant went to see Jud"e %ustre at his chamber to in'uireabout the case filed b$ her husband and wh$ the accused have not$et been arrai"ned! She as(ed the Jud"e if it is possible to schedulehearin"s on Januar$ and Februar$ and ever$ month thereafterwherein he responded in the affirmative and told the complainant tocome bac(! As re'uested, she went to see Jud"e %ustre at hischamber! There he told her the he prepared an order of theaccused! She than(ed him and said that if the accused would pa$,she would "ive him five percent of its as a to(en of "ratitude! Atthat point, Jud"e %ustre stood up and told the complainant that hedoes not need the mone$! )hile Jud"e %ustre was "ivin" the cop$ ofthe order, he touched her shoulder down to her breast! &e told thecomplainant that he acceded to her re'uest and that she shouldcome bac( before the hearin"! Because of what happened whereinthe Jud"e molested and too( advanta"e of her, complainant did not

"o bac(! The Jud"e cancelled the hearin"s on all the dates as perre'uest of the counsel of the accused! B$ the wa$ thin"s were"oin", she could sense that Jud"e %ustre is dela$in" the case andthat the complainant and her husband were runnin" out of mone$!Because of the dilemma, complainant decided to see the Jud"e andas(ed him wh$ he cancelled the hearin"s! The Jud"e responded thatthe complainant fooled him because she did not come bac( to himas per re'uest, whereas he acceded to her earlier re'uest! Jud"e%ustre told complainant that she must obe$ his wishes if she wantsthe case to "o smoothl$! The$ both went to the Jud"es car wherehe (issed her on the lips and caressed her breast! Complainant

could not do an$thin" as the Jud"e was deliberatel$ dela$in" hercase! The Jud"e then a"ain ordered her to come bac( to his office!)hen complainant came bac(, the Jud"e the a"ain (issed her,caressed her bod$ and ordered her to masturbate him! Complainantcould not do an$thin" but obe$! The Jud"e then as(ed her to "o withhim to %a"una de Ba$ *nn! )hen she refused, he "ot an"r$!Complainants law$er filed a #otion to Set case for hearin" andcomplainant did not "o bac( and see Jud"e %ustre at %a"una de Ba$*nn! As a result, no schedule was set for April and #a$, instead theJud"e made the settin" in June! Complainant went to see Jud"e

%ustre to in'uire wh$ the case was not scheduled on #a$! &eresponded that he waited for the complainant but she did not come!

8/13/2019 Liwanag vs Judge Lustre

2/3

&e told the complainant that she should not fool him, +masama dawsi$an" ma"alit! She re'uested Jud"e %ustre to "ive complainantmonthl$ hearin"s! The Jud"e said that he would if she would followhis wishes! &e e-posed his penis and told the complainant toperform +fellatio! Jud"e %ustre further made arran"ements that

the$ would meet and he would brin" her to .iverview .esort!Complainant could not refuse because of the threats on her case!The Jud"e told her that there would be hearin" for Jul$ and Au"ust!Then he undressed himself and ordered her to perform +fellatio onhim and complainant obe$ed as she was willin" to do an$thin" forthe future of her son and famil$! The same arran"ement too( placeuntil complainant reali/ed that she could not ta(e it an$more!Complainant is emboldened with dis"ust and frustration and shesee(s the intervention of the &onorable Supremem Court! Apartfrom the letter and sworn statement, complainant also sentphoto"raphs showin" her and respondent to"ether in variousplaces, five of which were ta(en from .iverview .esort! She alsosubmitted receipts issued b$ the resort!

.espondents defense is anchored on denial and that thechar"es a"ainst him are +vile products of 0complainants1 maliciousand pre2udiced mind! &e claimed that he could not have been inthe chamber as earl$ as 3455 am as alle"ed b$ the complainant ashe usuall$ arrives for wor( some five to ten minutes before 6455 inthe mornin"! &e further pointed out that at the a"e of 73, with aheart ailment and diabetes, +se- is be$ond 0his1 ph$sical capacit$!The Supreme Court resolved to refer the matter to Jud"e 8eralde/,

9-ecutive Jud"e of the .TC for investi"ation, report andrecommendation! *n his report, Jud"e 8eralde/ recommendeddismissal of the complaint a"ainst respondent since complainantfailed to establish his "uilt be$ond reasonable doubt! &e pointed outthat complainant merel$ relied on photo"raphs showin" her andrespondent to"ether, which do not establish the acts complained of!The Court thereafter referred the case to the :ffice of the CourtAdministrator for evaluation, report and recommendation! The :CAfind credible the alle"ations of complainant %ualhati %iwana"! The:CA recommended that the respondent be dismissed from theservice with forfeiture of all retirement benefits!

*SS;9

)hether or not respondent is "uilt$ of "ross immoralit$ and "ravemisconduct unbecomin" of his profession!

&9%