Dismissed Cebu Judges to Ask Reconsideration Against “Harsh Ruling”

The four judges from Cebu who were ordered dismissed from the service after they were found guilty of irregularities in the solemnization of marriages are planning to ask the Supreme Court to reconsider its harsh ruling against them.

In a per curiam decision dated April 2, 2013, the Supreme Court dismissed Judge Anatalio Necessario, Judge Gil Acosta, Judge Rosabella Tormis and Judge Edgemelo Rosales, all assigned with different branches of the Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) in Cebu City based at the Palace of Justice.

Former Regional Trial Court (RTC) executive judge Meinrado Paredes described the High Court’s ruling against the four Cebu-based MTCC judges as “too much” considering that some of them are already retirable from the service.

Paredes, however, explained that his statement is just an expression of sentiments because the decision was made by all of the 15 Supreme Court justices who want to rid the entire judiciary of any kinds of illegal activities.

Some lawyers believed that while the four concerned judges can file motion for reconsideration of the Supreme Court rulling, the chances of getting a favorable decision will be very slim.

A per curiam decision is a ruling issued by the Supreme Court or an appellate court [2] of multiple judges [3] in which the decision rendered is made by the court [4] acting collectively and anonymously. A per curiam does not list the individual judge responsible for writing the decision.

This is the second time, in just a couple of days, that the Supreme Court ordered for dismissal against Tormis because she was similarly ordered dismissed from the judiciary service after she was also found guilty in another administrative case for gross ignorance of the law, negligence and other similar cases.

The High Court’s ruling said Judges Necessario, Tormis and Rosales had violated the law when they solemnized marriages even if the requirements submitted by the couples were incomplete and questionable.

The Office of the Court Administrator earlier described the Palace of Justice in Cebu City as a hub of swift marriages because the respondent judges and some court personnel disregarded the law and procedure about the conduct of marriage.

In some cases, the Supreme Court says, it was discovered that said judges solemnized marriages even if one of the contracting parties are foreigner who did not submit certificates from their respective embassies to prove that they have the legal capacity to marry or that they are not married in their countries.

Moreover,the decision added that there were marriages that were solemnized by them even in the absence of marriage license and the contracting parties were just made to fill up the application for a license on the same day the marriage was done.

The High Court ordered the forfeiture of their retirement benefits and barred them from working in any office or agency of the government, including government-owned or controlled corporations (GOCC).