In re complaint of Marcos against Judge Ferdinand Marcos (1996)

Facts
-- Mrs. Marcos was the wife of Judge Ferdinand Marcos. She and her
children complained
against her husband alleging that ever since Mr. Marcos
was appointed as a judge of the
RTC at Cebu, his family had never seen/took
hold of his checks, that they have only been
receiving a minimal amount which
was insufficient for their education and for their sustenance
-- Mrs. Marcos and her kids prayed that all the remuneration due Judge
Marcos from the SC be directly released to Mrs. Marcos at the school where she
has been serving for 20 years to
prevent Mr. Marcos mistress from getting
them
-- Mr. Marcos says that hes been supporting complainant and was regularly
giving his wife money. He also denies having a mistress
-- Deputy Court Administrator recommends: complaint be considered
closed and terminated as there was a letter-withdrawal submitted by
complainants
o Report of DCA not approved by the Court Administrator and the case
remained
suspended until CJ Davide reported to the court En Banc on the
incident he
witnessed at the Fun Run
-- Judge Marcos has a woman with him at the Fun Run, upon the CJ
questioning Marcos,
he admitted that he had been living with the woman and
that he was separated from his
wife
-- CJ referred the case to the OCA and suspended Judge Marcos
o During the hearing it was found out that Judge Marcos indeed have
another
woman (bills that were paid by the Judge to an account
unfamiliar to complainant,
things that were bought that she didnt
remember seeing, a car was bought and was
registered in Judge Marcos
and Maydelane Tacaldo etc)
o Judge Marcos: it was actually his wife who had a lover, denies
everything else
thrown at him
Issue: w/n Judge Marcos is guilty of violating the Canons of Judicial Conduct. Yes.
Ratio:
-- Judge Marcos and Ms. Tacaldo jointly bought a motor vehicle -a Toyota
Revo - and had it registered in their names as co-owners. They obtained
insurance for the same vehicle with them
as joint beneficiaries. These
actions clearly indicate that they were the joint owners of the
Toyota Revo.
-- Respondent's posture that Mrs. Marcos is also guilty of immorality does
not excuse nor even
mitigate his actions. It is respondent's private action that
is being investigated not his wife's.
-- Jdge Marcos candidly and frankly admitted to the Chief Justice that he
had been living with
Ms. Tacaldo for the last three years as he was already
separated from his wife. Bringing Ms.
Tacaldo to public functions was not in
good taste
-- considering that Judge Marcos was still very much married even if he and
his wife Rotilla
were already living separately. He had no right to flaunt

Maydelane Tacaldo as if she was his

wife. This conduct is certainly
unbecoming of a judge whose conduct must at all times be
beyond
reproach.
-- The fact that complainant has lost interest in prosecuting the
administrative case against herein respondent judge will not necessarily warrant
a dismissal thereof. Once charges have been filed, the Supreme Court may not
be divested of its jurisdiction to investigate and ascertain the truth of the matter
alleged in the complaint.
Judge Marcos is dismissed