Carlitos Lazo V. Judge Antonio V. Tiong A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173 December 15, 1998 Facts
Uploaded by
PammyCarlitos Lazo V. Judge Antonio V. Tiong A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173 December 15, 1998 Facts
Uploaded by
PammyCARLITOS LAZO v. JUDGE ANTONIO V.
TIONG
A.M. No. MTJ-98-1173
December 15, 1998
FACTS:
Complainant Carlitos Lazo is the private complainant in Criminal Case for
falsification and use of falsified document, which was assigned to respondent
judge. Carlitos Lazo alleged that respondent scheduled the arraignment of the
accused on November 14, 1996, which was a Thursday, when he knew full well
the proceedings could be had on that day because the trial prosecutor assigned to
respondent judge's sala was available only on Fridays. Complainant said that
because of the cancellation of the arraignment, his time and efforts were wasted
considering that he came all the way from Las Piñas, Metro Manila. He also
claimed that the warrant of arrest was not served on the accused, although it had
been issued much earlier, until the prosecutor called attention to this fact.
ISSUE:
Whether or not Judge Tiaong acted improperly in handling the case of his cousin.
RULING:
A judge should take no part in a proceeding where his impartiality might
reasonably be questioned. Also, Rule 137, Rules of Court, provides that no judge
or judicial officer shall sit in any case in which he, inter alia, is related to either
party within the sixth degree pf consanguinity or affinity, or to counsel within the
fourth degree computed according to the rules of the civil law. Under this
provision, the Presiding Judge is mandated to disqualify himself from sitting in a
case. He cannot exercise his discretion whether to inhibit himself or not.