When Article 32 is demandable from a judge

According to Albano, Article 32 of the New Civil Code enumerates basic constitutional rights of citizens. Violation of these rights may give rise to criminal and civil liability. In fact, even if the act that violates any of them does not amount to a crime, person may still be held civilly liable. Such civil action shall be proved only by preponderance of evidence.

As a rule, the responsibility under Article 32 of the Civil Code is not demandable from a judge. The basis of this is the principle of presumption of good faith in the performance of one’s duties and functions. (Albano) However, There are, however, exceptions are provided by the Revised Penal Code (Act No. 3815), viz:

Art. 204. Knowingly rendering unjust judgment. Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust judgment in any case submitted to him for decision, shall be punished by prision mayor, and perpetual absolute disqualification.

Art. 205. Judgment rendered through negligence. Any judge who, by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance, shall render a manifestly unjust judgment in any case submitted to him for decision shall be punished by arresto mayor and temporary special disqualification.

Art. 206. Unjust interlocutory order. Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust interlocutory order or decree shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period and suspension; but if he shall have acted by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance and the interlocutory order or decree be manifestly unjust, the penalty shall be suspension.

Art. 207. Malicious delay in the administration of justice. The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period shall be imposed upon any judge guilty of malicious delay in the administration of justice.

Popular Posts