THE Supreme Court has ordered the dismissal of a Makati City judge after finding him guilty of ignorance of the law and gross misconduct for rendering a decision in the 2012 killing of American Marine Maj. George Anikow not based on factual and legal bases.
In a 13-page decision, the SC imposed the ultimate administrative penalty of dismissal from service on Judge Winlove Dumayas of Makati City Regional Trial Court, Branch 59 for his wrongful judgment rendered on July 2, 2014 that downgraded the charge against two accused—Crispin de la Paz and Galicano Datu III —from murder to homicide.
Besides dismissal, the high court also ordered the forfeiture of his retirement benefits with prejudice to reemployment in government.
Dumayas is supposed to retire already this year.
The tribunal found Dumayas guilty of gross ignorance of the law and gross misconduct for rendering the decision without citing the required factual and legal bases and ignoring applicable jurisprudence.
The SC ruled that Dumayas committed “oppressive disregard of the basic requirements of due process” and “misused powers” granted to him by law when he sentenced the accused only to homicide supposedly due to a finding of self-defense as mitigating circumstance even without the accused invoking and proving it in their defense.
“His complete disregard of settled rules and jurisprudence on self-defense and of the events that transpired after the first fight, despite the existence of testimonial and physical evidence to the contrary, in the appreciation of the privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense casts serious doubt on his impartiality and good faith,” said the SC decision promulgated last March 6, but released to the media only on Monday.
The high court disagreed with the judge’s finding that the voluntary surrender of the two accused served as ordinary mitigating circumstance.
“In the case at bar, it was not shown from the evidence presented that the accused intended to surrender and admit the commission of the criminal; they did not even invoke self-defense during trial,” the SC noted.
“Here, the attendant circumstances would reveal that the acts of Judge Dumayas contradict any claim of good faith,” the SC said, adding that the judge “inappropriately appreciated” the supposed mitigating circumstances in the case.
The tribunal also faulted Dumayas’ sentence of prison term of four years, two months and one day to six years, which made the accused eligible for probation.
“He granted the separate applications for probation of Dela Paz and Datu, effectively sparing them from suffering the penalties they rightfully deserve. The pattern of said acts appears to be deliberate, calculated, and meant to unduly favor the accused,” the SC said.
The SC also cited that 13 other administrative cases were filed against Dumayas from 2003 to 2016.
“The Court takes the aforementioned incidents as evidence of respondent’s stubborn propensity not to follow the rule of law and procedure in rendering judgments and orders. This definitely has besmirched the integrity and seriously compromised the reputation, not only of his court, but more importantly, of the entire judicial system which he represents,” it stressed.
Court records showed that Anikow, then a Makati Bel-Air resident, and the four men figured in a brawl on the night of Nov. 24, 2012, after the latter demanded access through a gate going to Rockwell complex.
A reportedly drunk Anikow was beaten and stabbed to death.
