|
|
|
Biboso vs. Villanueva
A.M.
No. MTJ-01-1356. April
16, 2001
This is an administrative
complaint for sexual harassment against respondent Judge Osmundo Villanueva of the Fourth Municipal Circuit Trial Court,
Bagumbayan-Esperanza, Sultan
Kudarat.
Complainant said
that she was again molested by respondent on September
4, 1996 inside the latter’s chamber in Esperanza,
Sultan Kudarat. According to complainant,
she went to see respondent because he allegedly told her that
she had to sign some papers in “connection with the issuance
of a warrant of arrest.
In his Answer
to the complaint, respondent denied having made any sexual
advances against complainant at any time. He claimed that
complainant and her father-in-law, Cipriano
Biboso, trumped up charges against
him because he had dismissed two cases (Civil Case No. 71
entitled “Lucita Biboso
v. Haide Navarra” and Criminal Case
No. 1662-B entitled “Cipriano Biboso
v. Heide Navarra”)
filed by complainant and her father-in-law. He contended
that he could not have sexually molested complainant on August
20, 1996
in Esperanza because he was in Lebak,
Sultan Kudarat from August 19-23, 1996, discharging his duties as Acting Presiding
Judge of the First Municipal Circuit Trial Court for Lebak-Kalamansig, Sultan Kudarat.
The evidence
presented during the investigation of the case fails to show
that respondent sexually harassed complainant. Contrary to
her statement in her affidavit-complaint that respondent judge
sexually molested her on August 20, 1996 inside his chamber
in Esperanza, Sultan Kudarat, complainant
testified during the investigation of this case that their
meeting actually took place on August 27, 1996 in the courthouse
in Bagumbayan, Sultan Kudarat, during which respondent merely shook her hand,
The inconsistencies
between her testimony and complaint-affidavit, in contrast
to the credible testimonial and documentary evidence presented
by respondent, put in serious doubt the veracity of her claims.
Indeed, it appears, as respondent judge claims,
that this case was filed to punish him for having dismissed
the cases filed by complainant and her father-in-law, especially
as the filing of this case came on the heels of the dismissal
of the latter. There could no other reason for complainant
to turn against respondent when the latter had previously
helped complainant in her legal problems to the extent of
preparing her father-in-law’s complaint-affidavit for estafa
against Navarra and even issuing
a writ of execution in one case (Civil Case No. 71) and a
warrant of arrest in another (Criminal Case No. 1662-B).
Furthermore, it took complainant more than a year after the
commission of the alleged sexual harassment on September 4,
1996 to file the instant administrative complaint. Even complainant's
explanation as to why she executed her affidavit-complaint
only on October 16, 1997 was conflicting. She initially stated
that she was only able to execute her complaint-affidavit
for this case on said late date because rumors had spread
by that time that she was respondent’s lover (kabit).
During her cross-examination, however, she stated that she
had to defer the execution of her complaint because she had
to wait for her husband to come back from Manila.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Republic Act No.
7877
Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995
Section 1.
Title. - This Act shall be known as the
"Anti-Sexual Harassment Act of 1995."
Section 2.
Declaration of Policy. - The State shall
value the dignity of every individual, enhance the development of
its human resources, guarantee full respect for human rights, and
uphold the dignity of workers, employees, applicants for employment,
students or those undergoing training, instruction or education.
Towards this end, all forms of sexual harassment in the employment,
education or training environment are hereby declared unlawful.
Section 3.
Work, Education or Training-Related, Sexual Harassment Defined.
- Work, education or training-related sexual harassment is committed
by an employer, employee, manager, supervisor, agent of the employer,
teacher, instructor, professor, coach, trainor,
or any other person who, having authority, influence or moral ascendancy
over another in a work or training or education environment, demands,
requests or otherwise requires any sexual favor from the other, regardless of whether the demand, request
or requirement for submission is accepted by the object of said
act.
(a) In a work-related or employment
environment, sexual harassment is committed when:
(1) The sexual favor is made
as a condition in the hiring or in
the employment, re-employment or continued employment of said
individual, or in granting said individual favorable compensation,
terms of conditions, promotions, or privileges; or the refusal
to grant the sexual favor results in limiting, segregating or
classifying the employee which in any way would discriminate,
deprive or diminish employment opportunities or otherwise adversely
affect said employee;
(2) The above acts would impair
the employee's rights or privileges under existing labor laws;
or
(3) The above acts would result
in an intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment for the
employee.
(b) In an education or training
environment, sexual harassment is committed:
(1) Against one who is under
the care, custody or supervision of the offender;
(2) Against one whose education,
training, apprenticeship or tutorship is entrusted to the offender;
(3) When the sexual favor is
made a condition to the giving of a passing grade, or the granting
of honors and scholarships, or the payment of a stipend, allowance
or other benefits, privileges, or consideration; or
(4) When the sexual advances
result in an intimidating, hostile or offensive environment
for the student, trainee or apprentice.
Any person who directs or induces
another to commit any act of sexual harassment as herein defined,
or who cooperates in the commission thereof by another without which
it would not have been committed, shall also be held liable under
this Act.
Section 4. Duty of the Employer or Head of Office in a Work-related, Education
or Training Environment. - It shall be the duty of the employer
or the head of the work-related, educational or training environment
or institution, to prevent or deter the commission of acts of sexual
harassment and to provide the procedures for the resolution,
settlement or prosecution of acts of sexual harassment. Towards
this end, the employer or head of office shall:
(a) Promulgate appropriate rules
and regulations in consultation with and joint1y approved by the
employees or students or trainees, through their duly designated
representatives, prescribing the procedure for the investigation
of sexual harassment cases and the administrative sanctions
therefor.
Administrative sanctions shall
not be a bar to prosecution in the proper courts for unlawful
acts of sexual harassment.
The said rules and regulations
issued pursuant to this subsection (a) shall include, among others,
guidelines on proper decorum in the workplace and educational or training
institutions.
(b) Create a committee on decorum
and investigation of cases on sexual harassment. The committee
shall conduct meetings, as the case may be, with officers and
employees, teachers, instructors, professors,
coaches, trainors, and students or trainees
to increase understanding and prevent incidents of sexual harassment.
It shall also conduct the investigation
of alleged cases constituting sexual harassment.
In the case of a work-related
environment, the committee shall be composed of at least one (1)
representative each from the management,
the union, if any, the employees from the supervisory rank, and
from the rank and file employees.
In the case of the educational
or training institution, the committee shall be composed of at
least one (1) representative from the administration, the trainors,
instructors, professors or coaches and students or trainees,
as the case may be.
The employer or head of office,
educational or training institution shall disseminate or post
a copy of this Act for the information
of all concerned.
Section 5.
Liability of the Employer, Head of Office, Educational
or Training Institution. - The employer or head of office,
educational or training institution shall be solidarily
liable for damages arising from the acts of sexual harassment committed
in the employment, education or training environment if the employer
or head of office, educational or training
institution is informed of such acts by the offended party and
no immediate action is taken.
Section 6.
Independent Action for Damages. - Nothing
in this Act shall preclude the victim of work, education or training-related
sexual harassment from instituting a separate and independent action
for damages and other affirmative relief.
Section 7. Penalties. - Any person who violates the provisions of this
Act shall, upon conviction, be penalized by imprisonment of not
less than one (1) month nor more than six (6) months, or a fine
of not less than Ten thousand pesos (P10,000)
nor more than Twenty thousand pesos (P20,000), or both such fine
and imprisonment at the discretion of the court.
Any action arising from the violation
of the provisions of this Act shall prescribe
in three (3) years.
Section 8.
Separability Clause. - If any portion or provision of this Act is declared
void or unconstitutional, the remaining
portions or provisions hereof shall not be affected by such declaration.
Section 9.
Repealing Clause. - All laws, decrees,
orders, rules and regulations, other issuances, or parts thereof inconsistent with the provisions of this Act are hereby
repealed or modified accordingly.
Section 10.
Effectivity Clause.- This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days after its
complete publication in at least two (2) national newspapers of
general circulation.
Back to top |
