FACTS:

Petitioner filed a Verified Complaint against Judge Clapis for Grave Misconduct and
Corrupt Practices, Grave Abuse of Discretion, Gross Ignorance of the Law, and violations of
Canon 1 (Rule 1.01, 1.02), Canon 2 (Rule 2.01), and Canon 3 (Rule 3.05) of the Code of
Judicial Conduct relative to a criminal case.
Petitioner alleged that she met Judge Clapis at the Golden Palace Hotel in Tagum
City to talk about the case of her brother. The prosecutor of the said case, Graciano Arafol,
informed the petitioner that the Judge will do everything for her favor but on the pretext that
in return she has to give P50,000.00 to the Judge. During the meeting, the Judge, after
being satisfied of the promise of the petitioner for that amount, told her "Sige, kay ako na
bahala, gamuson nato ni sila." (Okay, leave it all to me, we shall crush them.)
When the case was set on hearing, the Notices of Hearings were mailed to the
petitioner only after the date of hearing. Judge Clapis started conducting the bail hearings
without an application for bail and granting the same without affording the prosecution the
opportunity to prove that the guilt of the accused is strong. He set a preliminary conference
seven months from the date it was set, patently contrary to his declaration of speedy trial for
the case.
However, the judge claimed that notices were made verbally because of time
constraints. Nevertheless, he stressed that both sides were given the opportunity to be
heard since in almost all proceedings, petitioner was in court and the orders were done in
open court. He admitted that his personnel inadvertently scheduled the preliminary
conference of the case.

ISSUE:
Whether or not the respondent Judge is guilty of the charges.

RULING:
YES.
Judge Clapis liable for gross ignorance of the law for conducting bail hearings without
a petition for bail being filed by the accused and without affording the prosecution an
opportunity to prove that the guilt of the accused is strong. Here, the act of Judge Clapis is
not a mere deficiency in prudence, discretion and judgment but a patent disregard of
well-known rules. When an error is so gross and patent, such error produces an inference of
bad faith, making the judge liable for gross ignorance of the law. If judges are allowed to
wantonly misuse the powers vested in them by the law, there will not only be confusion in the
administration of justice but also oppressive disregard of the basic requirements of due
process.