Retired judges still accountable

With reference to the news item, “CA orders recall of arrest warrant vs Du30 critic” (4/14/19), we find it disheartening how retired Cavite Regional Trial Court judge Emily Alino Geluz got away with her gross ignorance of the law so easily.

For a mere infraction of the rules on Mandatory Continuing Legal Education, she ordered the imprisonment of a lawyer for not paying the fine imposed on him.

The rules promulgated by the Supreme Court only authorize the striking out of pleadings and filing of charges for disciplinary action (including disbarment) against such a lawyer, before the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) submits recommendations to the high court for final disposition.

The former trial judge treated the fine she imposed as subject to “subsidiary imprisonment” if unpaid, as if there was a conviction for a criminal offense. The Court of Appeals ruled it was patently wrong and voided the arrest warrant. Case closed?

This is one major flaw in our justice system. Why was the trial judge not held to account for her gross ignorance of the law? So she has retired, big deal. She still receives her pension, courtesy of taxpayer money. Why not go after that, or better still, charge her before the IBP for some disciplinary action as a lawyer? Tinkering with people’s liberty is not something to be simply sneezed at.

That should serve as a wake-up call to numerous sitting judges who think and act like tyrants — that they can still be held accountable even after retirement, which should not be thought of as a pass to immunity and impunity. If nothing else happens to errant judges whose bad decisions only get reversed, many of them will continue to behave like tyrants, or worse, like mercenaries.

ARNULFO M. EDRALIN, [email protected]