A.M. No. P-04-1789 (Formerly OCA IPI No. 02-1402-P) - JUDGE JOSE MANUEL P. TAN, COMPLAINANT, VS. HENRY G. PAREDES, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 29, SURIGAO CITY.[A.M. NO. RTJ-04-1841 (FORMERLY OCA IPI NO. 02-1523-RTJ)]HENRY G. PAREDES, COMPLAINANT, VS. JUDGE JOSE MANUEL P. TAN.RESOLUTION

Ruling

Accordingly, Judge Tan called a staff meeting and confronted respondent Sheriff Paredes who admitted asking P10,000 from the plaintiffs to defray the expenses for the demolition of a fence, and receiving P3,000 for the execution of the judgment. Later, Judge Tan placed Sheriff Paredes on preventive suspension. Judge Tan attached to his report, the affidavits of Atty. Paulino Chua, an employee of Branch 29, who witnessed the confrontation; Prosecutor Jesse Rey Silvosa, who allegedly espied on the sheriff in an adjacent room; and plaintiff Mrs. Mijares who made Sheriff Paredes sign cash vouchers which were also attached to the complaint. In his Comment , [3] respondent Sheriff Paredes denied he demanded money from Mrs. Mijares. According to him, he told her to deposit the money with the Clerk of Court to defray the cost of demolition. He claimed he began the demolition and incurred expenses. He asked reimbursement from Mrs. Mijares who asked him to sign the vouchers, which he did. According to the sheriff, the confrontation inside the chamber of Judge Tan was malicious, self-serving, coercive, and intimidating. He claimed Judge Tan suspended and withheld his salaries and other benefits, without giving him any opportunity to explain. In addition, even though Civil Case No. 5147 was not scheduled on that day, Judge Tan called the case, to announce the alleged extortion. He claimed that Judge Tan filed the complaint against him to justify his suspension from the service and used his position to influence Atty. Chua, who was reluctant to execute his affidavit, and Mrs. Mijares, who showed no interest. Judge Tan, in his Reply-Affidavit , [4] countered that he neither intimidated respondent nor influenced the witnesses. He denied being a relative of Prosecutor Silva. According to Judge Tan, he suspended respondent to prevent him from extorting more money from litigants. Meanwhile, Judge Tan also filed a criminal case against Sheriff Paredes with the Office of the Ombudsman for Mindanao. The Ombudsman deferred the criminal complaint pending the determination of the instant administrative case. [5] In A.M. No. RTJ-04-1841 , Sheriff Paredes in a letter-complaint [6] dated June 24, 2002, charged Judge Tan for gross ignorance of the law, oppression, gambling, misconduct, and immorality. He asserted that Judge Tan ordered him to execute the writ of execution in Civil Case No. 5147. He claimed he told Judge Tan that they should wait for a resolution from the Court of Appeals since the defendants appealed the case. This infuriated Judge Tan who went on to order the demolition of the improvements in the premises. Hence, he told the plaintiffs to deposit with the Clerk of Court, the amount for the necessary expenses. In the meantime, he began to demolish the fence even without the deposit. He admitted in a staff meeting that he asked P10,000 from the plaintiffs and that he received P3,000. According to him, Judge Tan got angry and accused him of extortion before h