Criminal Liabilities of Public Official

Only available on StudyMode
  • Topic: Penalty
  • Pages : 16 (4200 words )
  • Download(s) : 85
  • Published : March 22, 2013
Open Document
Text Preview
CRIMINAL LIABILITIES OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS

misfeasance

is any person, who, by
direct provision of law,
popular election or
appointment by
competent authority, shall
take part in the
performance of public
functions in the
government, or shall
perform in said
government or in any of
its branches public duties
as an employee, agent or
subordinate official of any
rank or class

Dereliction of Duty by Officers Related
to the Administration of Justice
Articles 204 - 209
Art. 204. Knowingly rendering unjust judgment. – Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust judgment in any case
submitted to him for decision, shall be punished by prison
mayor and perpetual absolute disqualification.
one which is not in accordance
with the law and the evidence

applying a law which has
been repealed or a decision
which has been reversed

Art. 205. Judgment rendered through negligence. –
Any judge who, by reason of inexcusable negligence or
ignorance shall render a manifestly unjust judgment in any
case submitted to him for decision shall be punished by
arresto mayor and temporary special disqualification.

Art. 206. Unjust interlocutory order. – Any judge who shall knowingly render an unjust interlocutory order or decree shall suffer the penalty of arresto mayor in its minimum period and suspension; but if he shall have acted by reason of inexcusable negligence or ignorance and the interlocutory order or decree be manifestly unjust, the penalty shall be suspension

.
granting bail to a nonbailable offense

Art. 207. Malicious delay in the administration of justice. – The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period
shall be imposed upon any judge guilty of malicious delay
in the administration of justice.
frequent grant of postponements,
delaying the decision or failure to
render the decision within the time
allowed by law

However, before a Judge can be
charged for Rendering an Unjust
Judgment or Unjust Interlocutory
Order, there must be a “final and
authoritative judicial declaration
that the decision or order in
question is indeed unjust.” The
pronouncement may result from
either:

An action for Certiorari or prohibition in the
higher court impugning the validity of the
judgment or

An administrative proceeding in the Supreme Court
against the judge precisely for promulgating an
unjust judgment or order ( Joaquin vs. Borromeo,
241 SCRA 248)

Art. 208. Prosecution of offenses; negligence and tolerance. – The penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period and suspension shall be imposed upon any public officer, or officer of the law, who, in dereliction of the duties of his office, shall maliciously refrain from instituting prosecution for the punishment if violators of the aw, or shall tolerate the commission of offenses.

Prosecutors and
their assistants

The prevarication includes:

BIR agents who
fail to report
violations of the
NIRC

Chiefs of Police in
municipalities who
are by law allowed to
appear as prosecutors
in the MTC/MCTC in
the absence of
regular Prosecutors

Forestry Agents
who fail to
apprehend and
file charges
against illegal
loggers

Barangay Captains

Art. 209. Betrayal of trust by an attorney or solicitor – Revelation of secrets. – In addition to the proper administrative action, the penalty of prision correccional in its minimum period or a fine ranging from 200 to 1,000 pesos, or both, shall be imposed upon any attorney-at-law or solicitor (procurador judicial) who, by any malicious breach of professional duty or of inexcusable negligence or ignorance shall prejudice his client or reveal any of the secrets of the latter learned by him in his professional capacity.

Revealing the Secrets of a Client
learned by him in his professional
duty

Causing prejudice to the client
through malicious breach of
professional duty or inexcusable
negligence. There must be damage
to the client

Representing...
tracking img