!"#$%&' $%)%' &$*%+, -%.#!* /0123401256 &**78 9+:.

# ;#'+


:&$<#''# &,,# -8 .=*%#::#>
G.k. No. L-66371 May 1S, 198S

ANG v. CAS1kC

CNLN1L: kLLCVA, !"

8ACkGkCUND
november 1983 ! Armando Ang flled an admlnlsLraLlve
complalnL agalnsL !udge !ose . CasLro ln Lhe Cfflce of Lhe
resldenLlal AsslsLanL on Legal Affalrs for lgnorance of Lhe law,
gross lnexcusable negllgence concernlng Clvll Case no. C-33466.
uecember 23, 2983 ! upon learnlng of Lhe admlnlsLraLlve case
flled agalnsL hlm by Ang, !udge CasLro ordered peLlLloner Lo
appear before hlm and Lo show cause why he should noL be
punlshed for conLempL of courL, for mallclous, lnsolenL,
lnexcusable dlsrespecL and conLempLuous aLLlLude Lowards Lhe
courL and Lowards hlm.
!anuary 9, 1984 ! !udge CasLro held Ang ln conLempL and
senLenced hlm Lo 3 days lmprlsonmenL, and ordered hls arresL
for hls fallure, desplLe noLlce, Lo appear on Lhe scheduled
hearlng of Lhe conLempL charge agalnsL hlm.
lebruary 3, 1984 ! Ang flled for noLlce of appeal whlch was
denled by !udge CasLro.
SubsequenLly, !udge CasLro flled a crlmlnal case of llbel agalnsL
Ang for uslng mallclous, lnsolenL and conLempLuous language
agalnsL hlm ln hls leLLer-complalnL flled before Lhe Supreme
CourL (Lhls ls dlfferenL from Lhe one flled wlLh Lhe Cfflce of Lhe
resldenL).
1hereafLer, Ang flled a peLlLlon for cerLlorarl, prohlblLlon and
mandamus ln Lhe Supreme CourL asklng (1) for Lhe order
holdlng hlm ln conLempL Lo be seL aslde, (2) Lo en[oln !udge
CasLro from enforclng Lhe order of arresL of Ang on Lhe ground
of conLempL, (3) Lo resLraln respondenL AsslsLanL llscal narclso
1. ALlenza of Cuezon ClLy from conducLlng prellmlnary
lnvesLlgaLlon on Lhe llbel charge flled agalnsL hlm by respondenL
[udge.
lebruary 20, 1984 ! a Lemporary resLralnlng order was lssued
Lo granL Lhe (2) and (3) of Ang's requesL.
o llscal narclso 1. ALlenza, however, explalned LhaL Lhe
lnformaLlon for llbel had been flled on lebruary 2, 1984
- even before Lhe 18C was lssued. !"#$ &'()$$&*+, -).
"/,' ") 0$")(1 "/, (.,+&'&23.4 &25,$"&63"&)2 *,738$,
"/, $3', /39 3+.,394 *,,2 7)27+89,9:
upon learnlng of Lhe lnformaLlon of llbel flled agalnsL hlm, Ang
flled a supplemenLal peLlLlon whlch conLalned hls requesL (4) Lo
prohlblL respondenL !udge !ose . Arro of Lhe 8eglonal 1rlal
CourL of 8lzal, 8ranch Clll, Cuezon ClLy from proceedlng and/or
conducLlng a hearlng on Lhe crlmlnal complalnL for llbel
March 3, 1984 ! a 18C was lssued en[olnlng !udge Arro from
proceedlng wlLh Lhe crlmlnal case for llbel.

ISSULS 1C 8L kLSCLVLD
1. WheLher or noL Ang may be held for conLempL on Lhe basls of
Lhe language he used ln hls leLLer complalnLs Lo Lhe Cfflce of Lhe
resldenL and Lo Lhe Supreme CourL.

kLSCLU1ICNS AND AkGUMLN1S
ISSUL 1 ! Whether or not Ang may be he|d for contempt on the bas|s
of the |anguage he used |n h|s |etter comp|a|nts to the Cff|ce of the
res|dent and to the Supreme Court. ! NC. 1he a||eged ma||c|ous
|mputat|ons were not uttered |n the presence or so near respondent
Iudge Iose . Castro as to obstruct or |nterrupt the proceed|ngs before
h|m, rather, they were conta|ned |n the p|ead|ngs and]or |etters-
comp|a|nt f||ed by pet|t|oner before the Cff|ce of the res|dent|a|
Ass|stant on Lega| Affa|rs and before th|s Court |n the aforement|oned
adm|n|strat|ve case f||ed by pet|t|oner aga|nst h|m.

MAICk CIN1 1: Sect|on 3(b) and (d), ku|e 71 def|ne |nd|rect
contempt. 1he |anguage found |n the |etters of Ang can, at most, be
!"#$%&' $%)%' &$*%+, -%.#!* /0123401256 &**78 9+:.# ;#'+


:&$<#''# &,,# -8 .=*%#::#>
he|d as |nd|rect contempt, but def|n|te|y not d|rect contempt was
what |s be|ng a||eged by Iudge Castro.
!udge CasLro argues LhaL fallure of peLlLloner Lo appear, desplLe
noLlce, on Lhe scheduled hearlng of Lhe conLempL charge for Lhe
use of derogaLory language ln hls Lwo leLLers addressed Lo Lhe
Cfflce of Lhe resldenLlal AsslsLanL on Legal Affalrs and Lo Lhls
CourL ln an admlnlsLraLlve complalnL agalnsL hlm, consLlLuLes
dlrecL conLempL as Lhe acLs acLually lmpeded, embarrassed and
obsLrucLed hlm ln Lhe admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlce.
1he SC DISAGkLLS: 1he use of dlsrespecLful or conLempLuous
language agalnsL a parLlcular [udge ln pleadlngs presenLed ln
anoLher courL or proceedlng ls lndlrecL, noL dlrecL, conLempL as
lL ls noL LanLamounL Lo a mlsbehavlor ln Lhe presence of or so
near a courL or [udge as Lo lnLerrupL Lhe admlnlsLraLlon of
[usLlce. SLaLed dlfferenLly, lf Lhe pleadlng conLalnlng derogaLory,
offenslve or mallclous sLaLemenLs ls submlLLed ln Lhe same
courL or [udge ln whlch Lhe proceedlngs are pendlng, lL ls dlrecL
conLempL because lL ls equlvalenL Lo a mlsbehavlor commlLLed
ln Lhe presence of or so near a courL or [udge as Lo lnLerrupL Lhe
admlnlsLraLlon of [usLlce.

MAICk CIN1 2: Ang cannot be he|d ||ab|e for ||be| as the a||eged|y
s|anderous |anguage found |n h|s |etter comp|a|nts to the Cff|ce of the
res|dent and the Supreme Court are cons|dered as pr|v||eged
commun|cat|on.
SanLlago v. Calvo (48 hll. 922) ! a communlcaLlon made ln
good falLh upon any sub[ecL maLLer ln whlch Lhe parLy maklng
Lhe communlcaLlon has an lnLeresL or concernlng whlch he has
a duLy ls prlvlleged lf made Lo a person havlng a correspondlng
lnLeresL or duLy, alLhough lL conLalns lncrlmlnaLory or
derogaLory maLLer whlch wlLhouL Lhe prlvllege would be
llbelous and acLlonable, x x x LhaL parLles, counsel and wlLnesses
are exempLed from llablllLy ln llbel or slander for words
oLherwlse defamaLory publlshed ln Lhe course of [udlclal
proceedlngs, provlded Lhe sLaLemenLs are perLlnenL or relevanL
Lo Lhe case."