Philippine Supreme Court Public Information Office

Paano ang proseso ng pagpapiyansa? Panoorin ang buong video: youtu.be/Nu7eMWaNwUU

Iginiit ng #KorteSuprema na maaari ring maging biktima ng seksuwal na karahasan ang mga lalaki. Binigyang-diin nito na dapat protektahan ng batas ang lahat ng biktima ng pang-aabuso anuman ang kanilang kasarian. Sa Desisyon na isinulat ni Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, napatunayang nagkasala ang isang babae ng acts of lasciviousness laban sa kanyang 11 taong gulang na pamangkin. Nangyari ang insidente habang bumibisita ang bata sa bahay ng mga kamag-anak ng kanyang ama. Habang natutulog ang bata, ginising siya ng babae, inutusang maghubad, at pinahiga sa kanyang kama. Pagkatapos, nakipagtalik ang babae sa bata. Hindi agad tumutol ang bata dahil naging interesado siya sa nangyayari. Gayunman, matapos ang insidente, nakaramdam siya ng hiya at naisipang magpakamatay. Napatunayan ng Regional Trial Court at Court of Appeals na nagkasala ang babae ng acts of lasciviousness kaugnay ng Section 5(b) ng Republic Act No. (RA) 7610 o Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act. Hindi sinang-ayunan ng Korte Suprema ang argumento ng babae na pumayag ang bata sa pangyayaring seksuwal. Paliwanag nito, ang age of consent noong 2018, kung kailan nangyari ang insidente, ay 12 taong gulang pataas. Dahil 11 taong gulang lang ang bata noon, itinuring siyang walang legal na kakayahang magbigay ng pahintulot. Gayunman, nilinaw ng Korte na statutory acts of lasciviousness sa ilalim ng Article 336 ng Revised Penal Code (RPC), at hindi ang RA 7610, ang tamang kasong dapat ipataw laban sa babae. Ipinaliwanag ng Korte na naaangkop ang RA 7610 kapag tila pumapayag ang isang menor de edad sa seksuwal na gawain dahil sa pamimilit o impluwensiya ng isang nakatatanda. Hindi ito naaangkop kapag lubusang walang kamalayan, walang malay, o walang legal na kakayahang magbigay ng pahintulot ang menor de edad gaya ng nangyari sa kasong ito. Sinabi ng Korte na kinasuhan ang babae ng statutory acts of lasciviousness dahil hindi saklaw ng legal na depinisyon ng rape sa ilalim ng Article 266-A ng RPC ang kanyang mga ginawa noong nangyari ang krimen. Nililimitahan ng batas dati ang depinisyon ng rape sa pagpasok ng ari ng lalaki sa ari ng babae, gayundin sa pagpasok ng ari ng lalaki o anumang bagay sa ari ng ibang tao. Gayunman, pinalawak ng Republic Act No. 11648, na naisabatas noong 2022, ang depinisyon ng rape. Sa ilalim nito, maaari nang magkasala ng rape ang sinumang tao na nakipagtalik sa ibang tao sa ilalim ng mga sitwasyong itinakda ng batas. Ayon sa Korte Suprema, ang paggamit ng salitang “person” sa batas sa halip na tukuyin ang kasarian ng gumawa ng krimen ay nangangahulugang maaari ring magkasala ng rape ang mga babae. Napansin ng Korte na sa kabila ng pagbabagong ito, may ilang desisyon pa ring naglalarawan sa rape bilang krimeng ginagawa ng mga lalaki laban sa mga babae. Iniugnay nito ang ganitong pananaw sa mga lumang batas tungkol sa rape na nakaugat sa patriyarkal na paniniwala. Orihinal na idinisenyo ang mga batas na ito hindi para protektahan ang mga babae laban sa karahasan, kundi para parusahan ang mga lalaking kumukuha sa mga babae na itinuturing noon na pag-aari ng kanilang mga ama o asawa sa pamamagitan ng rape. Sinabi nito na hindi lang sexist o may pagkiling sa kasarian ang ganitong mga paniniwala tungkol sa rape, kundi ibinubukod din ng mga ito ang mga lalaking biktimang dumaranas ng kaparehong trauma. Ang hindi pagkilala na maaari rin silang maging biktima ng rape ay maaari ring magpahirap sa kanila na matanto na nilabag ang kanilang pagkatao. Hinatulan ang babae ng pagkakakulong nang siyam hanggang 16 na taon at inatasang magbayad ng PHP 250,000 bilang civil indemnity at danyos. Basahin ang press release sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17603…. Basahin ang Desisyon sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17566…. Basahin ang Separate Concurring Opinion ni Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17567…. Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…. #SupremeCourtPH #SCphTranslations

The #SupremeCourtPH has ruled that men can also be victims of sexual violence, stressing that the law must protect all victims of abuse regardless of gender. In a Decision written by Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen, the SC En Banc found a woman guilty of committing acts of lasciviousness against her 11-year-old nephew. The incident happened while the child was visiting the home of his father’s relatives. While the child was asleep, the woman woke him up, ordered him to remove his clothes, and made him lie on her bed. She then engaged in sexual intercourse with him. The child did not protest at first because he was curious about what was happening. But after the incident, he felt ashamed and considered ending his life. Both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals found the woman guilty of acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b) of RA 7610, or the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation, and Discrimination Act. Before the SC, the woman argued that the child had consented to the sexual act. The SC disagreed. It explained that at the time of the incident in 2018, the age of sexual consent was 12 years old. Because the child was only 11, he was deemed legally incapable of giving consent. The SC clarified, however, that the proper offense is statutory acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), not RA 7610. The SC explained that RA 7610 applies when a minor appears to consent to sexual activity due to the coercion or influence of an adult. It does not apply when a minor is entirely unaware, unconscious, or unable to give legal consent, as in this case. The SC also noted that the woman was charged with statutory acts of lasciviousness because, at the time of the offense, her acts did not fall within the legal definition of rape under Article 266-A of the RPC. The law then limited the act of rape to a man inserting his penis into a woman’s vagina, as well as the insertion of a penis or any object into another person’s genital. However, RA 11648, enacted in 2022, expanded the definition of rape, now stating that it may be committed by any person who has carnal knowledge of another person under the circumstances specified by law. The SC said the use of the term person in the law instead of specifying the perpetrator’s gender allows for the commission of rape even by women. The SC noted that despite this amendment, some rulings continue to describe rape as a crime committed by men against women. It traced this view to older, patriarchal rape laws that were originally designed not to protect women from violence, but to punish men for taking women—who were considered the property of their fathers or husbands—through rape. The SC held that these beliefs about rape are not only sexist, but also exclude male victims who suffer the same trauma. The failure to recognize that they can be victims of rape can also make it harder for them to realize that they were violated. The woman was sentenced to prison for nine to 16 years and ordered to pay PHP 250,000 in civil indemnity and damages. Read the full text of the Press Release at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17603… Read the full text of the Decision at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17566… Read the Separate Concurring Opinion of Associate Justice Jhosep Y. Lopez at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17567… Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…

Court operations in some areas in the Philippines are suspended on Friday, October 30, 2026 (except as otherwise indicated). Visit our Facebook page for full copies of memoranda: - 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐅𝐈𝐑𝐒𝐓- 𝐀𝐍𝐃 𝐒𝐄𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐃-𝐋𝐄𝐕𝐄𝐋 𝐂𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐓𝐒 𝐍𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍𝐖𝐈𝐃𝐄, 𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐑𝐓𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝟏𝟐:𝟎𝟎 𝐏.𝐌. - to allow Judges and court personnel ample time to prepare for the observance of All Saints' Day and All Souls' Day Judicial Region (JR) 1 - 𝐌𝐓𝐂 𝐒𝐭𝐚. 𝐁𝐚𝐫𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐚, 𝐏𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐧 - Agew Na Sta. Barbara - 𝐑𝐓𝐂, 𝐁𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐡 𝟓-𝐅𝐂, 𝐃𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐬; 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂, 𝐃𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐫𝐚𝐬-𝐌𝐚𝐫𝐜𝐨𝐬; 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂, 𝐏𝐢𝐝𝐝𝐢𝐠-𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐢-𝐒𝐨𝐥𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚; 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂, 𝐒𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐚𝐭-𝐕𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚𝐫; 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂 𝐁𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐚 (𝐄𝐬𝐩𝐢𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐮)-𝐍𝐮𝐞𝐯𝐚 𝐄𝐫𝐚, 𝐈𝐥𝐨𝐜𝐨𝐬 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞 - power interruption JR 3 - 𝐌𝐓𝐂 𝐁𝐚𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐫, 𝐏𝐚𝐦𝐩𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚 - power interruption JR 4-A - 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂 𝐏𝐚𝐝𝐫𝐞 𝐁𝐮𝐫𝐠𝐨𝐬-𝐀𝐠𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐧, 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐳𝐨𝐧 - power interruption JR 9 - 𝐌𝐓𝐂 𝐌𝐮𝐭𝐢𝐚 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝟐𝐧𝐝 𝐌𝐂𝐓𝐂 𝐏𝐢ñ𝐚𝐧-𝐋𝐚 𝐋𝐢𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐝, 𝐙𝐚𝐦𝐛𝐨𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞 - power interruption JR 11 - 𝐀𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐏𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐨 𝐂𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐃𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐨 𝐝𝐞𝐥 𝐍𝐨𝐫𝐭𝐞 - 14th Binulig Festival JR 12 - 𝐀𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐎𝐂𝐂 𝐢𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐨 𝐂𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐌𝐚𝐠𝐮𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐨 - expected traffic congestion due to the inaugural session of the First Bangsamoro Regular Parliament Please refer to the memos for additional details. #SCPhWalangPasok #SupremeCourtPH

Sa sesyon nito noong Oktubre 28, 2026, tinanggal ng #KorteSuprema sa serbisyo ang Clerk II ng Municipal Trial Court of Romblon, Romblon dahil sa serious dishonesty at gross misconduct matapos niyang gamitin sa sariling kapakinabangan ang pondo ng hukuman. Sinuspinde rin nito ang Clerk of Court II ng nasabing hukuman dahil sa gross neglect of duty. Inatasan silang dalawa na magbayad nang solidaryo (alinman sa kanila ay maaaring singilin nang buo) ng PHP 598,444.20 na kumakatawan sa nawawalang pondo ng hukuman. Nag-ugat ang kaso laban kay Clerk II Rose Ann R. Marzonia (Marzonia) at Clerk of Court II Wina M. Cometa (Cometa) sa financial audit na isinagawa ng Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) mula Pebrero 2008 hanggang Marso 2023. Natuklasan sa audit ang kakulangan sa Fiduciary Fund, Sheriff’s Trust Fund, Judiciary Development Fund, Special Allowance for the Judiciary Fund, Mediation Fund, General Fund-New, Legal Research Fund, at Victim’s Compensation Fund. Batay sa audit, paulit-ulit na nag-withdraw si Marzonia ng pondo ng hukuman nang walang pahintulot at hindi niya idineposito ang mga nakolektang halaga. Inamin din niyang pinakialaman niya ang mga passbook ng Fiduciary Fund at Sheriff’s Trust Fund sa tulong ng ilang indibidwal sa Recto, Maynila, at pineke ang mga lagda ng Presiding Judge at ni Cometa sa mga withdrawal slip. Samantala, bilang opisyal na responsable sa pangangasiwa ng pondo ng hukuman, pinayagan ni Cometa si Marzonia na humawak ng mga transaksiyong pinansiyal nang walang nakasulat na awtorisasyon at wastong pangangasiwa. Nabigo rin siyang regular na pagtugmain ang mga talaan ng bangko, tiyaking ligtas ang mga passbook, at magsumite ng mga kinakailangang buwanang ulat pinansiyal. Napatunayang nagkasala si Marzonia ng serious dishonesty at gross misconduct dahil sa paulit-ulit na pamemeke ng mga dokumentong pinansiyal, mga hindi awtorisadong pag-withdraw, at maling paggamit ng pondo ng hukuman. Ipinakita ng mga ito ang sinadya at sistematikong pamamaraan para dayain ang Hudikatura at pagtakpan ang kanyang mga ginawa. Dahil sa bigat ng kanyang mga paglabag, tinanggal siya sa serbisyo, pinawalang-bisa ang lahat ng kanyang benepisyo, at tuluyan siyang diniskuwalipika sa muling pagpasok sa serbisyo sa anumang pampublikong tanggapan. Samantala, sinabi ng Korte Suprema na maituturing na gross neglect of duty ang pagkabigo ni Cometa na maayos na pangasiwaan ang kanyang mga tauhan at ipatupad ang mga pangunahing pananggalang sa paghawak ng pondo. Binigyang-diin nito na bilang mga opisyal na may pananagutan sa pondo ng hukuman, hindi maaaring iwasan ng mga Clerk of Court ang kanilang pananagutan sa pamamagitan lamang ng pag-asa sa tila regular na anyo ng mga dokumento o pagsisi sa kanilang mga tauhan. Ibinukod ng Korte ang pananagutan ni Cometa sa pananagutan ni Marzonia. Wala itong nakitang ebidensiya na direktang nakilahok si Cometa sa maling paggamit ng pondo ng hukuman, pamemeke ng mga dokumento, o nakinabang siya sa mga iregularidad. Isinaalang-alang din ng Korte na ito ang kanyang unang paglabag at naglingkod siya sa Hudikatura sa loob ng humigit-kumulang 30 taon nang walang naunang parusa. Dahil dito, sinuspinde siya nang walang sahod at benepisyo sa loob ng walong buwan. Iniutos din ng Korte na gamitin ang naipong leave credits at iba pang benepisyo nina Cometa at Marzonia para matugunan ang kakulangan sa pondo ng hukuman. Inatasan din ng Korte ang Bureau of Immigration na maglabas ng hold departure order laban kay Marzonia. Basahin ang press release sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17593…. Ia-upload sa website ng Korte Suprema ang buong teksto ng Desisyon kapag available na ito. Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…. #SupremeCourtPH #SCphTranslations

The #SupremeCourtPH 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤, during its session on October 28, 2026, acted on JIB FPI No. 23-255-P (𝘖𝘧𝘧𝘪𝘤𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘊𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘵 𝘈𝘥𝘮𝘪𝘯𝘪𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘷. 𝘞𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘔. 𝘊𝘰𝘮𝘦𝘵𝘢 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘙𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘈𝘯𝘯 𝘙. 𝘔𝘢𝘳𝘻𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘢) by dismissing Marzonia, Clerk II of the Municipal Trial Court of Romblon, Romblon, for serious dishonesty and gross misconduct after she misappropriated court funds, and by suspending Cometa, Clerk of Court II of the same court, for gross neglect of duty. Both were ordered to solidarily pay PHP 598,444.20, representing the missing court funds. The case stemmed from the Office of the Court Administrator’s (OCA) financial audit from February 2008 to March 2023, which found shortages in the Fiduciary Fund, Sheriff’s Trust Fund, Judiciary Development Fund, Special Allowance for the Judiciary Fund, Mediation Fund, General Fund-New, Legal Research Fund, and Victim’s Compensation Fund. Based on the audit, Marzonia repeatedly withdrew court funds without authorization and failed to deposit collections. She also admitted tampering with the Fiduciary Fund and Sheriff’s Trust Fund passbooks with the help of individuals in Recto, Manila, and forging the Presiding Judge and Cometa’s signatures on withdrawal slips. Meanwhile, Cometa, as the officer responsible for managing court funds, allowed Marzonia to handle financial transactions without written authority and proper supervision. She also failed to regularly reconcile bank records, secure passbooks, and submit required monthly financial reports. The SC found Marzonia guilty of serious dishonesty and gross misconduct for her repeated falsification of financial documents, unauthorized withdrawals, and misuse of court funds, which showed a deliberate scheme to defraud the Judiciary and cover up her actions. Because of the seriousness of these offenses, the SC dismissed her from service, forfeited all benefits, and disqualified her from reinstatement or appointment to any public office. As for Cometa, the SC ruled that her failure to properly supervise her staff and enforce basic safeguards amounted to gross neglect of duty. It emphasized that Clerks of Court, as accountable officers, cannot avoid responsibility by relying on the apparent regularity of documents or blaming their subordinates. Read the full text of the Press Briefer at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17593…. The full text of the Supreme Court’s Decision shall be uploaded to the Supreme Court website once available. Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a….

Sa sesyon nito noong Oktubre 28, 2026, isinantabi ng #KorteSuprema ang magkahiwalay na petisyon para sa certiorari na kumukuwestiyon sa diskuwalipikasyon ng Commission on Elections (COMELEC) ng dalawang kandidato para sa pagka-miyembro ng Sangguniang Bayan ng Candijay, Bohol sa pambansa at lokal na halalan 2025. Hiniling ni Candijay Chief of Police Captain Marvin A. Chin ang diskwalipikasyon nina Charina C. Bagor (Bagor) and Erlinda Curativo (Curativo) dahil umano sa vote-buying. Inakusahan si Bagor ng pamamahagi ng mga food pack sa ilang indibidwal sa Candijay ilang araw bago ang halalan at paghiling sa mga ito na alalahanin siya bilang kandidato. Samantala, inakusahan naman si Curativo ng pagbibigay ng PHP 60,000 sa isang barangay kagawad at pag-uutos na ipamahagi ang tig-PHP 100 sa bawat botante bago ang halalan. Diniskuwalipika ng COMELEC sina Bagor at Curativo alinsunod sa Section 68 ng Omnibus Election Code matapos nitong matukoy na may substantial evidence na nagkaroon ng vote-buying. Pinagtibay ng Korte Suprema ang pasya ng COMELEC. Ipinasiya nitong namahagi si Bagor ng mga bagay na may halaga kapalit ng mga boto, samantalang namahagi naman si Curativo ng pera para impluwensiyahan ang mga botante na suportahan siya. Dahil sa kanilang diskuwalipikasyon, pinawalang-bisa ang proklamasyon sa kanila bilang mga nanalong kandidato. Binigyang-diin ng Korte Suprema na sinisira ng vote-buying ang malaya at patas na halalan. Dagdag nito, sinasamantala ng vote-buying ang kalagayang pang-ekonomiya ng mga botante at pinananatili silang umaasa sa anumang halagang ibinibigay sa kanila kapalit ng kanilang mga boto. Pinapalitan nito ng salapi ang malayang pagpapasya ng mga botante, kaya dapat itong wakasan. Basahin ang press release sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17593…. Ia-upload sa website ng Korte Suprema ang buong teksto ng Desisyon kapag available na ito. Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…. #SupremeCourtPH #SCphTranslations

The #SupremeCourtPH 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤, during its session on October 28, 2026, acted on G.R. No. E-02233 (𝘊𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘢 𝘊. 𝘉𝘢𝘨𝘰𝘳 𝘷. 𝘊𝘖𝘔𝘌𝘓𝘌𝘊) and G.R. No. E-03605 (𝘌𝘳𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘢 𝘊𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘷𝘰 𝘷. 𝘊𝘖𝘔𝘌𝘓𝘌𝘊) by denying the petitions for certiorari filed by Charina Bagor and Erlinda Curativo which assailed their disqualification by the Commission on Elections as candidates for Member of the Sangguniang Bayan of Candijay, Bohol in the 2025 National and Local Elections. Candijay Chief of Police Captain Marvin A. Chin sought the disqualification of Bagor and Curativo for alleged vote-buying. Bagor was accused of distributing food packs to several individuals in Candijay days before the election and asking them to remember her as a candidate. Meanwhile, Curativo was accused of giving PHP 60,000 to a Barangay Kagawad with instructions to distribute PHP 100 to each voter before the election. The COMELEC disqualified Bagor and Curativo under Section 68 of the 𝘖𝘮𝘯𝘪𝘣𝘶𝘴 𝘌𝘭𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘊𝘰𝘥𝘦 after finding substantial evidence of vote-buying. The SC affirmed the decision, holding that Bagor handed out valuable items in exchange for votes, while Curativo distributed money to influence voters to support her. Because they were disqualified, their proclamation as winning candidates was voided. The SC stressed that vote-buying undermines free elections and must be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and [its practitioners] prevented from entering into public office.” Vote-buying takes advantage of voters’ economic situation and keeps them dependent on whatever amount is given to them in exchange for their votes. It replaces the will of the voters with money and must be stopped. Read the full text of the Press Briefer at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17593…. The full text of the Supreme Court 𝘌𝘯 𝘉𝘢𝘯𝘤’s Decision shall be uploaded to the Supreme Court website once available. Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a….

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) has submitted to the President on October 29, 2026 its short lists of nominees for Chief Justice and Associate Justice of the Supreme Court (SC) following the respective impending retirements of Chief Justice Alexander G. Gesmundo on November 6 and SC Associate Justice Amy C. Lazaro-Javier on November 16. Named in the short list for Chief Justice are SC Senior Associate Justice Marvic M.V.F. Leonen and SC Associate Justices Alfredo Benjamin S. Caguioa, Rodil V. Zalameda, Japar B. Dimaampao, and Jose Midas P. Marquez. Of the five Senior SC Justices, Associate Justices Ramon Paul L. Hernando and Henri Jean Paul B. Inting, withdrew the acceptance of their respective nominations. Named in the short list for SC Associate Justice are Court of Appeals (CA) Associate Justice Ramon M. Bato, Jr.; Solicitor General Darlene Marie B. Berberabe; Commission on Audit Chairperson Gamaliel A. Cordoba; CA Associate Justices Ramon A. Cruz, Maria Elisa Sempio Diy, and Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez; CA Presiding Justice Fernanda Lampas Peralta; Commission on Elections Commissioner Ernesto P. Maceda, Jr.; CA Justices Ronaldo Roberto B. Martin and Walter S. Ong; and Court of Tax Appeals Associate Justice Maria Rowena M. San Pedro. The JBC is constitutionally mandated to recommend nominees to the President for vacant posts in the Judiciary and the Office of the Ombudsman. Article VIII, Section 4(1) states that vacancies in the SC must be filled within 90 days from the vacancy. Read the full Press Release at sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17595… Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…

Ibinaba ng #KorteSuprema ang pananagutang administratibo ng isang dating punong-guro ng paaralan na nagputol ng mga puno nang walang kaukulang mga permit. Ayon sa Korte, simple misconduct at simple neglect of duty lang ang napatunayan ng mga ebidensiya at hindi sapat para sa grave misconduct. Sa Desisyong isinulat ni Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., bahagyang pinagbigyan ng Ikalawang Dibisyon ng Korte Suprema ang petisyon ni Melencio E. Corpuz (Corpuz), dating punong-guro ng Bagong Sikat Elementary School na tinanggal sa serbisyo dahil sa insidente. Muli ring pinagtibay ng Korte ang pamantayan ng pagpapatunay sa mga kasong administratibo at binigyang-diin na kailangan ng substantial evidence na nagpapakita ng layuning gumawa ng katiwalian o tahasang pagwawalang-bahala sa batas para mapatunayan ang grave misconduct. Nag-ugat ang kaso sa reklamong administratibo na inihain nina Radamalyn F. Cardoza at iba pa laban kay Corpuz para sa grave misconduct at sa paglabag sa Republic Act No. 3571, na nagbabawal sa pagputol, pagsira, o pananakit sa mga puno sa pampublikong lugar nang walang kaukulang permit. Ayon kina Cardoza, iniutos ni Corpuz ang pagputol ng mga puno sa loob ng bakuran ng paaralan nang walang kaukulang permit, ginamit ang ilan sa mga kahoy para sa pansariling kapakinabangan, at ipinagiba ang isang gusali ng paaralan nang walang kaukulang pahintulot o wastong talaan ng mga materyales na nakuha mula rito. Inakusahan din nila si Corpuz na ginamit ang ilan sa mga pinutol na puno sa paggawa ng mga kabinet para sa mga guro, samantalang ibinenta naman niya umano ang iba bilang panggatong at ibinulsa umano ang ilan sa pinagbilhan. Bagama’t iniutos ng Office of the Ombudsman na tanggalin si Corpuz sa serbisyo dahil sa grave misconduct, sinabi ng Korte Suprema na maituturing lang ang kanyang mga paglabag na simple misconduct at simple neglect of duty. Nabigong kumuha ni Corpuz ng mga permit bago ipaputol ang ilang punongkahoy at hindi rin niya naipaliwanag nang maayos ang kinahinatnan ng mga materyales mula sa giniba na gusali ng paaralan. Sinabi ng Korte na hindi ipinakita ng mga nakalap na ebidensya na nakinabang si Corpuz sa pagbebenta ng mga pinutol na puno o na may masamang hangarin siya. Binago ng Korte ang parusang ipinataw kay Corpuz at iniutos ang anim na buwang suspensiyon sa halip na pagkakatanggal sa serbisyo. Kung wala na siya sa serbisyo, maaari itong palitan ng multang katumbas ng kanyang sahod sa loob ng anim na buwan. Basahin ang press release sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17585…. Basahin ang Desisyon sa sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17317…. Sumunod sa Credit Attribution Policy ng SC PIO: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a…. #SupremeCourtPH #SCphTranslations

The #SupremeCourtPH has reduced the administrative liability of a former school principal who cut trees without the required permits, ruling that the evidence supported findings of simple misconduct and neglect of duty but not grave misconduct. In a Decision penned by Associate Justice Antonio T. Kho, Jr., the SC’s Second Division partially granted the petition for review on certiorari of Melencio Corpuz, former principal of Bagong Sikat Elementary School who was dismissed from service due to the incident. Reaffirming the standard of proof for administrative liability, the Court emphasized that grave misconduct requires substantial evidence of corrupt intent or a flagrant disregard of the law. The case arose from an administrative case filed by Radamalyn Cardoza and others against Corpuz for violation of Republic Act No. 3571—which prohibits the cutting, destroying, or injuring of trees in public places without permit—and grave misconduct. Cardoza and the others claimed that Corpuz ordered the cutting of trees within school premises without proper permits, used some of the lumber for personal benefit, and demolished a school building without the required authorization or proper accounting of salvaged materials. They also alleged that some of the cut trees were used to make teachers’ cabinets, while Corpuz sold others as firewood and pocketed some of the proceeds from the sales. While the Office of the Ombudsman ordered Corpuz’s dismissal from service for grave misconduct, the SC held that Corpuz’s infractions amounted only to simple misconduct and simple neglect of duty, as he failed to secure permits for cutting of certain trees and did not properly account for the materials from the demolished school building. The SC found that the evidence adduced did not show that Corpuz personally benefited from the sale of the cut trees or that his actions were motivated by corrupt intent. The SC ruled that absent any showing of personal gain, demand, or conversion on Corpuz’s part, the Ombudsman’s conclusion that he profited from the proceeds of the sale cannot be sustained. It therefore modified the penalty imposed on Corpuz, ordering a six-month suspension instead of dismissal, with the penalty convertible to a fine equivalent to his salary for six months if he was no longer in service. Read the full text of the Press Release at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17585… Read the full text of the Decision at: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/?p=17317… Copying of this content is subject to the SC PIO’s Credit Attribution Policy: sc.judiciary.gov.ph/credit-a….

Newly uploaded pleading in current cases involving public interest: G.R. No. E-08751 (Robinhood Ferdinand C. Padilla et al. v. Senate of the Philippines, sitting as an Impeachment Court, et al.) - Resolution sc.judiciary.gov.ph/wp-conte… Copies of recent pleadings and orders in cases involving public interest are regularly uploaded to the Current Cases page of the #SupremeCourtPH website. SCAN the QR Code for the latest uploads.

Updated as of 11:30 A.M., October 28, 2026 JR 11 - 𝐀𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐨𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐒𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐢, starting 9:30 A.M. - post-earthquake safety inspections and damage assessments