Supreme Court E-Library
510 PHILIPPINE REPORTS
Re: Letter of Rafael Dimaano Requesting Investigation of the Alleged
Illegal Activities Purportedly Perpetrated by Justice Lantion, CA-CDO
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED.
SO ORDERED.
Sereno, C.J., Carpio, Velasco, Jr., Leonardo-de Castro,
Peralta, Bersamin, Perlas-Bernabe, Leonen, Caguioa, Martires,
and Tijam, JJ., concur.
Del Castillo and Jardeleza, JJ., on official leave.
Mendoza, J., no part.
EN BANC
[A.M. No. 17-03-03-CA. July 11, 2017]
RE: LETTER OF RAFAEL DIMAANO REQUESTING
INVESTIGATION OF THE ALLEGED ILLEGAL
ACTIVITIES PURPORTEDLY PERPETRATED BY
ASSOCIATE JUSTICE JANE AURORA C. LANTION
OF THE COURT OF APPEALS, CAGAYAN DE ORO
CITY, and a CERTAIN ATTY. DOROTHY S.
CAJAYON OF ZAMBOANGA CITY
[IPI No. 17-258-CA-J. July 11, 2017]
RE: UNSWORN COMPLAINT OF ROSA ABDULHARAN
AGAINST ASSOCIATE JUSTICE JANE AURORA C.
LANTION OF THE COURT OF APPEALS,
CAGAYAN DE ORO CITY, and a CERTAIN ATTY.
DOROTHY S. CAJAYON OF ZAMBOANGA CITY
SYLLABUS
1. REMEDIAL LAW; ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEEDINGS
AGAINST JUDGES AND JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF
Supreme Court E-Library
512 PHILIPPINE REPORTS
Re: Letter of Rafael Dimaano Requesting Investigation of the Alleged
Illegal Activities Purportedly Perpetrated by Justice Lantion, CA-CDO
ALLEGATIONS, CONJECTURES AND SUPPOSITIONS
WILL LEAVE AN ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT
WITH NO LEG TO STAND ON.— In administrative
proceedings, the quantum of proof necessary for a finding of
guilt is substantial evidence or that amount of relevant evidence
that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a
conclusion. It must be stressed that the burden of substantiating
the charges in an administrative proceeding falls on the
complainant, who must be able to prove the allegations in the
complaint with substantial evidence. Reliance on mere
allegations, conjectures and suppositions will leave an
administrative complaint with no leg to stand on. In this case,
not only are the two handwritten letter-complaints unverified,
they are also unsupported by any affidavits or documents which
would validate the charges against the respondents. Even if
the Court sets aside technicality, the handwritten letters of the
complainants are couched in general terms that contain no
material, relevant and substantial allegation to support the
accusation of continuous and widespread selling of a favorable
decision in CA-CDO. The complainants failed to aver specific
acts or to present proof to show that Justice Lantion and Atty.
Cajayon were in cahoots and involved in the continuous and
widespread selling of a favorable decision in CA-CDO.
Moreover, the Court notes that these allegations/reports were
filed after the lapse of seven (7) years from the time Justice
Lantion was transferred to CA-Manila. Indeed, if Justice
Lantion and Atty. Cajayon should be disciplined for a grave
offense, the evidence against them should be competent and
should be derived from direct knowledge.
RESOLUTION
MENDOZA, J.:
Before the Court are two (2) Letter-Complaints filed by Rosa
Abdulharan (Abdulharan) and Rafael Dimaano (Dimaano)
charging Justice Jane Aurora C. Lantion (Justice Lantion), Court
of Appeals, Cagayan de Oro City (CA-CDO) and Atty. Dorothy
Cajayon (Atty. Cajayon) with selling a favorable decision.
Supreme Court E-Library
518 PHILIPPINE REPORTS
Re: Letter of Rafael Dimaano Requesting Investigation of the Alleged
Illegal Activities Purportedly Perpetrated by Justice Lantion, CA-CDO
in the complaint with substantial evidence.14 Reliance on mere
allegations, conjectures and suppositions will leave an
administrative complaint with no leg to stand on.15
In this case, not only are the two handwritten letter-complaints
unverified, they are also unsupported by any affidavits or
documents which would validate the charges against the
respondents. Even if the Court sets aside technicality, the
handwritten letters of the complainants are couched in general
terms that contain no material, relevant and substantial allegation
to support the accusation of continuous and widespread selling
of a favorable decision in CA-CDO. The complainants failed
to aver specific acts or to present proof to show that Justice
Lantion and Atty. Cajayon were in cahoots and involved in the
continuous and widespread selling of a favorable decision in
CA-CDO. Moreover, the Court notes that these allegations/
reports were filed after the lapse of seven (7) years from the
time Justice Lantion was transferred to CA-Manila. Indeed, if
Justice Lantion and Atty. Cajayon should be disciplined for a
grave offense, the evidence against them should be competent
and should be derived from direct knowledge. 16
Hence, in the case of Diomampo v. Judge Alpajora, 17 the
Court held that:
It must be stressed that any administrative complaint leveled against
a judge must always be examined with a discriminating eye, for its
consequential effects are by their nature highly penal, such that the
respondent stands to face the sanction of dismissal and/or disbarment.
Thus, the Court cannot give credence to charges based on mere
suspicion and speculation. As champion – at other times tormentor
– of trial and appellate judges, this Court must be unrelenting in
weeding the judiciary of unscrupulous judges, but it must also be
quick in dismissing administrative complaints which serve no other
purpose than to harass them. While it is our duty to investigate and
14
Dayag v. Judge Gonzales, 526 Phil. 48, 57 (2006).
15
Alfonso v. Ignacio, 487 Phil. 1, 7 (2004).
16
Id.
17
483 Phil. 560 (2004).
