The Philippines

Do you know if the Manila Standard Today is available in print form in Los Angeles, CA? I am looking for any distributor in Los Angeles whom would sell the paper edition of MST (Manila Standard Today) as sometimes they have balanced articles? How about other Philippine periodicals?

manila standard?

Does anybody know if Malu fernandez the journalist of People Asia Magazine and Manila Standard is back? I dont know if she's back writing for Manila Standard. Gosh! I loath her.

how thick is a piece standard printer paper and how thick is a standard manila folder paper? how thick is a piece standard printer paper and how thick is a standard manila folder paper? or what's the proportion b/t the two?

What is the standard commission rate for real state agents in metro manila philippines?

How much postage to send manila envelope to England? If I wanted to send a standard manila envelope to England from Arkansas, just by putting it in my personal mailbox, NOT through Fed-Ex or anything similar, how much postage would I need to put on it? If this depends on weight, it's probably under 1/2 lb. Thanks!

how much is the standard salary rate in manila, philippines for 10yrs experience electrical engineer?

school in Manila, Philippines That has 12th grade American standard.? My son is 11th grade here in california and his planning to go to school in the Philippines. I need more info on what school he could go to and the requirements. will he still be in high school or college, since we have longer years here in america.

What call center you know in Metro manila which has the lowest standard of being hired.? What call center you know in Metro manila which has the lowest standard of being hired. I don't know how to say this in English or Tagalog but it is like it has the easiest job interview to pass or something like "hindi mahigpit". I prefer to work in Makati or Ortigas but anywhere in Metro Manila will do. I'm only high school graduate, I have trained as an outbound agent in mandaluyong but i was dismissed after 4 days because I'm not following instructions. But that was 6 months ago so I think I can do it better.

what is the standard grade for 3rd year high school beacause i want to study in university of ateneo de manila

I was admitted in Ateneo de Manila University, can I possibly get into Cornell University? Ateneo de Manila University is said to be a Philippine Ivy League School but I hear people say it's not comparable to Yale, Harvard or Princeton. Without any intention to downgrade my country's educational standards, I do agree with the notion. But I'm just wondering, can Ateneo de Manila University's standards measure up to Cornell University's? My mom's here in Phil and my dad's in Ithaca. Ateneo's my top choice here but it doesn't offer the course I'm interested in. Help!

standard operating procedure of manila hotel?

Is there anyone that can recommend a hotel in Manila? I will stay for one month and I want a hotel that is clean and a descent standard. It is important that the price is overcoming and its near by Makati City, Metro Manila.

Are there a multitude of accents in Metro Manila alone? My friend is working on her thesis on the accents of Tagalog speakers in Metro Manila and she needs some help. Besides a standard Tagalog accent, are there any other accents that exists within Metropolitan Manila alone? For example, in Mandaluyong her team has noted a very loud boisterous accent, and in Makati they noted an accelerating accent. And there are also accents among those from Quezon City. They looked at both native and migrant speakers of Tagalog. Do accents exist for the different areas of Metro Manila esp. among native speakers for each area, or is it just coincidental? Thank you if you could answer.

What are quality hospitals in Metro Manila for treatment of Dengue Fever? My son has been diagnosed with Dengue in Manila, but the hospital he is admitted to does not have all the equipment necessary for tests and treatment. Is there a good hospital that has north american standards and equipment in Metro Manila that he should transfer to?

where is the service center of Standard (electric fans) in Manila? we have a ceiling fan that runs on a single (slow) speed despite adjusting the knob from 1 to 5. don't know if we can just buy a new speed controller (the knob) or have it serviced (hassle) but where? Thanks lezah. I called the service center and learned that a remote switch is less than P250. I think it's still worth having checked/repaired/replaced than buying a new one which probably costs at least P1200. It's for a small warehouse. When you're buying something for the business, you seek ways to save as much as possible don't you agree? :)

review centers for TOEFL exams in manila philippines? hi guys ... i need to take my toefl exams but i dont know where to go for review. can you please help me find one here in manila, philippines? how much is the standard payment for these review centers and please post the address and telephone numbers ... i hope these centers are registered and effective review centers ... thank you in advance.

How many stamps are required on a Manila envelope? Standard size envelope and I'm sending it from Mississauga to Etobicoke. The contents are my hair (Weird, I know, but I'm donating 13 inches of my hair to breast cancer research). Should I just get it weighed at the post office? Thanks in advance!

Where can I buy Japan gadgets here in Manila? I've been wanting to have a Tivo or a DVR box that I can hook up to my standard TV. If you can provide the place and pricing that will be appreciated. Thanks.

Who has details of the graft and corruption case of PHIVOLCS DIrector Raymundo for malversation & dishonesty? PHIVOLCS Director Raymundo Punongbayan was convicted of graft and corruption by PAGC sometime in 2003/2004 due to malversation of funds and dishonesty, among others. I remember reading in the Manila Standard article about the Malacanang final decision which convicted him stripping him of his retirement benefits. He died before his graft case was brought to court.

Can anyone tell me if the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Manila College of Medicine known to have high standards? ...in the field of medicine?and what is the tuition fee per sem?

can anyone tell me if the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Manila College of Medicine known to have high standards? ...in the field of medicine?and what is the tuition fee per sem?

How much is a pack of cigarettes in Manila Philippines? your standard camel lights or something.

Can anyone recommend a good hotel for a week in Manila City? i am looking to stay somewhere near the Manila bay or near Roxas boulevard. As long as its not more than 60$ £30 3200 pesos a night the less the better. But the hotel must be up to standards. Any recommendations? sorry thats 2800 pesos sorry thats 2800 pesos

Where can I buy a Weber BBQ in Manila? Would like to buy a standard 22.5", have searched the net. I would have thought, that they were readily available as PI is a proud BBQ nation

How much postage do I need? I want to send a package from Oregon to Illinois. It's in a standard manila envelope, and it weighs 4 oz. I would like to know how many stamps I need to put on; the USPS postage calculator is confusing. :[ ps. I'm sorry if this is miscategorized. I didn't really see anything... right. :]

I am looking for a dentist that has high standards in the Manila area. Hopefully one that has a website.? I will be there for 2 weeks and would like to have some work done at a fair price.

Information about indians living in manila. Quality of living & lifestyle in manila.? Would like to about living standard, quality of living for indians in manila.

is it ok for standard insurance to require client to shoulder 48% of repair cost? is it right for standard insurance in manila to do so? estimate washover (repaint) is P30,000. standard asks client to pay P14,000. that's little less than half of the cost. is that normal? by the way, this has been dragging since Oct 31. No concrete word from standard insurance as to "go or no go" re: repair. just asking, and i need help. is this common or deliberate delay? does it appear that they have no capacity to serve policyholders? I don't know. you professionals and experienced motorists may have answers. if this keeps dragging, what remedy or measure can individual policyholders take? what advice can you give to new policyholders in order that they won't suffer the same disappointment? by the way, it's about a comprehensive insurance policy. thanks.

When applying to Grad School, what type of envelopes do you use for letters of recommendation? I am asking for letters of recommendation and giving envelopes to send them directly to the college. Do I give them a standard business envelope or a manila envelope to return their letters in? If they need to sign over the flap, does it need to be put into another envelope? I will address and postage them before giving them out.

How much does a beer cost in the Philippines? Outside Manila, in a small town, in a local bar (nothing fancy or posh) how much will a standard bottle of beer cost? And while we are at it, how much is lunch in a cheap cafe for an ordinary student or worker?

What are the best cities around the Philippines? I'm a very city girl, I have been to Davao and its peaceful and all, but its soooo boring. I prefer to be at Manila or try to go to Cebu. Is Cebu are good city? I'm looking for very high standard place and at least have some city feeling with good people

What are the TRADITIONAL ingredients of the drink, Halo-Halo? I would like to know if it is made as a Filipino icon drink or is it just a standard thirst quencher there with no cultural significance?Does it get made differently between Islands? Do people in Manila make it different to Cebuanos?--Just curious. There you go--I learnt something. It's regarded as a dessert and NOT a drink, I always thought of it the other way round!

Does anyone know how to listen to Manila Philippines' rx 93.1 online? I follow the link from www.rx931.com/live.html and/or other websites pointing to the same link but only hear RadioPortal.com's standard announcement. I used to get it on my Win Media Player. Thanks for your help. I'm in the US and rely solely on the internet to listen to radio stations overseas, including the Philippines.

whats included in the standard motorolaq v3i package? i bought a new motorola v3i package, i got the unit, charger, battery, user manual, a free memory card, and usb cable. it did not have a cd software included for the pc, does it have one? i bought it in metro manila, philippines in southmall, adi telecoms, what is your suggestion. thanks

Instead of wifi the Manila Hotel has "wired internet connection in your room for a fee" what is needed for it. How would I connect to the net. Are laptops set to a standard for this wired connection?

Anybody know of a place in Manila that unlocks Nokia N96, 6500 Slide (BB5) handsets? Hi there,i will be coming back to the Philippines for my annual vacation in a few months time. I have bought several brand new Nokia handsets, N96 and 6500 Slide mainly to give to relatives as pasalubong. I got them cheap because they are currently locked to a UK network, and to get them unlocked here will cost me an average of P2,000 per handset. I will be staying in Manila upon my arrival for a few days before i go south to Cagayan De Oro. Is there anywhere in Manila that does BB5 handset unlocking? Before you post, the standard nokia code generators will not work, BB5 is a newer technology and the handsets are hardware locked, not software like earlier Nokia models.

How much is the RipStik in the Philippines? I would just like to know the price of the RipStik (can be classic or "G") here in the Philippines. And also where I can buy it near Manila (like Trinoma, SM Megamall, etc.). To have a comparison, what is the price range of a (standard, normal) skateboard? Plus, the price of the protective gears that I will need in learning to ride these things. Thanks in advance! :)

I'm looking for a hospital in Metro Manila....Which one is the best? I need to see a doctor and I'm wondering what is a good hospital to go to. I've heard of the following hospitals here: *St. Lukes Medical Center (Global City) *Asia Hospital and Medical Center (Alabang) *Makati Medical Center (Makati) Can anyone give me info on the quality of the hospitals mentioned. Also, what would the costs be to see a doctor (obviously its cheaper than the US) but are the costs reasonable by Philippine standards?

Good hotels to stay in Manila ranging USD 35- USD 50? Hello all, I want to know the Name of hotel, the price for a standard room with 2 beds or a king or queen size bet for 2 to stay for around 5 days in Manila. If it is close to the airport it would be even better. I am looking for the URL as well so that i could book it after reading your notes on the rooms. Thanks and regards ...Ram. If I have to get in touch with a agency for getting better deals for my stay in Manila, makati. Where can I find these agencies in Manila or in Clark. As i would be getting down in clark. Thanks.

Do Credits Transfer from Ateneo De Manila to Up Diliman? I am currently a freshman at Ateneo and by next school year (2010-2011), i would like to attend UP Diliman. I feel like it is a better fit for me and they have a more specific course in the area i want to study then what Ateneo offers. I am wondering if anyone knows if most freshman standard credits such as (English 11 English 12, Lit 14.. Natural Sciences, Basic Math (11, and 12) from Ateneo De Manila... Transfer over to UP? I am hearing rumors that most of he credits dont transfer over and many times you start again as a freshman. If this is the case, i would have to re consider my options. Thank you very much -student

Bayani Fernando's U Turn bridge(in Manila). Anyone familiar with the project? I'm just curius. How efficient that bridge will be compared with the standard flyover bridge? It was not detailed in the news tonight. How about we will assume it is safe. Will the traffic handling capability more efficient?

I want to take my Honda CRV from Philippines to Spain. How do I find out if car will meet EC regulations? I have a 2002 CRV bought in the Philippines - it was assembled here with many parts imported from Japan. I will be moving from Manila to Spain in the summer and am having difficulties establishing whether the car complies with EC standards on pollution, safety etc. Honda website not much use. Can anyone advise how to establish whether my car will be legal there?

I am looking for Affordable Hongkong Package (Manila departure)? HK regular package 3 people May 23-25 Regular HKG package including hotel, tranfers, airfare. optional 1/2 day city tour and daily breakfast Hotel choices: Guandong, Imperial, BP International, Shamrock(standard) Flight:PAL or Cebu Pacific MNL Dep-8am HKG Dep 8pm Kindly give me the rate including all the taxes. I am looking for the cheapest rate available. My budget is from $250-350.

What other "personal issues" does Manny Pacquiao have that are hushed up? 2007story, but since pac is greated like a filipino Jesus, there are lots of other stories that are kept secret over there. MANNY PACQUIAO: THE SAGA CONTINUES, PART I By Ronnie Nathanielsz PhilBoxing.com Sat, 18 Aug 2007 When Filipino ring idol Manny Pacquiao suddenly decided to forego plans to drive to Sacramento from Los Angeles last weekend to serve as captain of the Philippine Team in the World Cup of boxing against the ring warriors of Mexico at the Arco Arena, he sparked a flood of rumors and speculations that hounded him for a couple of days. The initial plan was for Pacquiao to face-off with legendary Mexican Marco Antonio Barrera, his October 6 adversary, who was to act as skipper of the Mexicans in the World Cup showdown. It was obviously a great way to hype the World Cup itself aside from their eagerly awaited rematch at the Mandalay Bay Resort Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, the boxing capital of the world. In fact, celebrated trainer Freddie Roach told Viva Sports/Manila Standard Today in one of several overseas telephone conversations that he was flying with Golden Boy Promotions Oscar De La Hoya in his private plane to Los Angeles to pick up Pacquiao and take him to Sacramento. Apparently, there was no seat available for Filipino trainer and Pacquiao’s boyhood friend Restituto “Buboy” Fernandez on the plane and Pacquiao told Roach he “didn’t want to leave Buboy” and said he would drive to Sacramento along with Fernandez in time for the fights. Roach recalls “he (Pacquiao) called me up and told me he had to go home to take care of a personal problem.” Scores of fight fans who were eagerly awaiting the arrival of Pacquiao at the official weigh-in and the fights themselves were sorely disappointed. The six Filipino boxers, looking to get a morale boost by the Pacman’s presence, to some extent felt abandoned. Even the Pacland website carried some adverse reaction by Pacquiao-bashers who criticized him for being “unpatriotic and unprofessional.” Pacquiao told us he didn’t make any commitment to go to Sacramento but he said “I prayed for our fighters because they were also fighting for our country and I wanted them to win and I am elated that they did” adding “my prayers were more important than my presence.” Jake Joson, the chief-of-staff of Pacquiao who is with him much of the time, sought to set the record straight. He said nobody had officially informed Pacquiao that he was being named team captain or that he was expected to be in Sacramento. “There was no official commitment although there was an invitation.” Whoever it was, took too much for granted. Besides, according to Joson, Pacquiao rushed to Los Angeles for the postponed press conference with Barrera at the plush Beverly Hills Hotel on Wednesday only to find out that it had been pushed back by two days. Of course they failed to remember that the first scheduled press conference had to be scrapped when Pacquiao failed to take the flight to LA and since it was too late to postpone the event, Top Rank promoter Bob Arum and Golden Boy CEO Richard Schaefer wound up as substitutes for a chat with sports media since they had resolved their bitter dispute over promotional rights to Pacquiao and had come to terms in the interest of the sport and some big money down the line. Joson admitted Pacquiao had “a personal problem” but nobody wished to inquire what it was all about although Joson did have an inclination that it concerned Manny’s wife Jinkee. Roach was surprised but, as always, he didn’t show his displeasure, publicly. At the same time he branded as “a lie” the claim that he and Pacquiao got into a spat which was one of the reasons why Manny flew back to Manila. Roach merely said that Manny “had some personal problems to attend to so he flew back to Manila.” What were the “personal problems?” If you knew Pacquiao you’d understand that he is rather superstitious. For instance, whenever he leaves for a fight in the US he either trains even for a short while at the rundown, old L&M Gym in a seedy backstreet in Manila or merely passes by, gives the heavy bag a couple of bare-fisted shots and says a prayer before leaving for the airport. The other reality is that he needs to have Fernandez by his side. One has only to recall the one hour delay before he finally checked in for the PAL flight to LA last week. When he learned that Buboy hadn’t a ticket and was scheduled to fly the following day, Pacquiao reportedly had his luggage off-loaded before a couple of phone calls to PAL president Jaime Bautista, according to Pacquiao’s business manager Eric Pineda, okayed a switch in tickets where longtime friend and confidant Rex “Wakee” Salud’s business class ticket for the trip was swapped and given to Fernandez just so Pacquiao would leave. Pacquiao was irritated by a newspaper article that claimed he left but not before reportedly inconveniencing the other passengers who were sitting i

Do you agree with Batistas point of view on this situation? Forecasting which young WWE superstars will break out is a common theme of press interviews with veteran wrestlers, but in the case of a recent interview with Batista, the outlook was pretty grim. “We’re dinosaurs in this age of instant gratification. We are not just athletes, we are also storytellers and I don’t see that in the newcomers,” says Batista in an interview with the Manila Standard Today. And Batista does not plan on offering his storytelling prowess for ever. If 'Big Dave' has his way, he will be "fat and retired" in five years. If he still works for WWE, he anticipates it will be in a behind-the-scenes capacity Credit: WrestlingHeadlines.com Is Batista correct in his opinion here that guys like him are a dying breed? I look at Batista as someone who is a relatively 'new' guy (he wasn't in WWE in the 90s), yet he kind of has a link to old school style performers too. His heel turn on Mysterio I thought was well done, in part because he got the true art down of what a heel is supposed to be. It was an old school type of heel turn. Is Batista the last of his kind, or do you have more faith in the new guys like Morrison and McIntyre? Absolutely the Morrisons and Zigglers are the future, but what are they missing that the guys of the past had?

Can't wait till Pacmac- Marquez 2!! Manny Pacquaio already talking crap about Marquez... Who wins? Filipino ring idol Manny Pacquiao who watched the lopsided twelve round decision scored by reigning WBC super featherweight champion Juan Manuel Marquez over a game but outclassed Rocky Juarez says Marquez was “not impressive” although the champion clearly impressed all three judges at the Desert Diamond Casino in Tucson, Arizona yesterday. In a long distance telephone conversation with Viva Sports/Manila Standard Today from his home in General Santos City where he watched the fight, Pacquiao said Marquez was ”slow and had no real power” noting that he couldn’t take out a much smaller Juarez despite catching him with some good right hands in the later round. If I'm not mistaking didn't Pacquiao say he could knock out marquez before their first fight he knocked him down 3 times, but not out....I think pacquiao is just talking i think he fears Marquez...Guess what I like Pacman too, but i think this fight would be great for boxing as well with Vasquez & R-Marquez 3 same card...... I think even Pacman would have trouble with juarez....Pacman is so full of himself saying marquez didn't have no speed or power on those punches last night!!!.....

pinoys what do you think about this? check this site out: http://www.tingog.com/social-concerns/malu-fernandez-people-asia-article-controversy-manila-standard-columnist.html

is roller blading a good way to have a flat tummy? is it a good cardio work out? ive tried jogging but i got bored of it. roller blading sounds like fun, so there. and another thing, what size should i get? my shoes size is 8.5 (american standard), should the in line skates be the same size or several sizes bigger? and in manila, where can i get one? how much is the price range? thank you. i need to lose weight in 3 months! thanks

Pinoys, what do you think about this? Check this site out. I originally asked this under "Society and Culture" but perhaps under "Philippines" category, this will have more responses. http://www.tingog.com/social-concerns/malu-fernandez-people-asia-article-controversy-manila-standard-columnist.html

do insurance companies in manila require policyholders to pay near 50% of cost of car repair? is it right for standard insurance to do so? estimate washover (repaintt) is P30,000. standard asks client to pay P14,000. that's little less than half of the cost. is that normal? by the way, this has been dragging since Oct 31. No concrete word from as to "go or no go" re: repair. just asking, and i need help. is this common or deliberate delay? does it appear that they have no capacity to serve policyholders? I don't know. you professionals and experienced motorists may have answers. thanks.

Do you guys know of a condo / room /apartment sharing in Makati, Manila Philippines that is a walking distance? from either: School of Fashion and the Arts in Makati, 88 Corporate Center Valero St., or Glorietta Mall, and only charges about P8k per month(even less would be better..*crossing fingers* haha) with electricity/water included, and utilities like washing machine, microwave oven, wifi/internet, a standard sized bed at least(no double bunk beds pls..i have a phobia), bathroom? I am a neat freak or rather a student on a very tight budget and can only shell out P35k for a 4 month stay rent due to very expensive tuition fees and materials.. :( Please leave contact persons with numbers below or website/picture of the place links if you know of anyone willing to share their space this end of May or June 2009. Thanks. :)

How to ship a game via standard mail? I know, sounds dumb but I don't know. I'm trading a game on Goozex for points and I have the person I have to ship it to and I have 3 days too do it and I'm not sure how to send the game. Can I just put it in a regular manila envelope with some bubble-wrap and put it in my mailbox or do I have to go to the post office? Goozex offers to sell me a USPS label to tape to the package and said something about how if I do that I don't have to go to the Post Office to send it. But they also offer a free printout and say to tape the bottom half to the front (bottom half contains shipping info) and put the information for customer top half in the envelope. So can I just do the free version and put it into a manila and ship it from my mailbox? Do I need stamps? Never really used the mail before lol... I need to know if I can send it from home, going to the post office isn't an option at the moment, I need to get it in the mail asap. It's midnight, I can't exactly go to the post office lol... I'm 15, I've mailed stuff before but just letters, I'm just wondering if I can stick the game in a manila envelope with my bubble wrap, address it and send it from my mailbox like I would a letter.

which is "the better" university between the two? ateneo de manila university or de la salle university these two are among the premier universities in the philippines. i intended not to include the University of the Philippines because for me no college can surpass its standards in terms of tertiary education in the country.

How do I change a folder icon in Vista back to it's original form? I have a Vista OS and I seem to have somehow altered the shape of my Downloads folder. Normally in the user folder there are 11 other folders: Contacts, Desktop, Documents, etc. and these have a greenish collar and a special design. Somehow my Downloads folder no longer has this green colored icon but a standard yellow manila envelope icon. I can't use the system restore option since the change occurred before a restore point. I don't wish to use a special program that alters or changes the icons either since I finally got Vista to work after having to reinstall it and I know that most programs of this nature are shareware and usually have a catch.

Where do I mail my Netflix movie? Ok, I accidentally mailed my own game in place of my Netflix rental. They returned the game in a manila envelope instead of the standard NF mailer, so now I have to send back the DVD in a regular envelope, so where do I send it? I found the address for my local distribution center, but is distribution and receiving the same department? Where exactly? I can't seem to find it. Anyways, my question is... Is the distribution center the same department as receiving???

resume question? i'm dropping off my resume. where should i put it? brown envelope? manila envelope? plastic folder? standard folder? what's the best? should i put my name on the envelope/folder?

Any idea??? I’m a BS Biology grad and I 'm planning to take nursing this October. Do you have an idea if how long I’m gonna finish that course and where can I find school which offers cheaper tuition fee but has a good standard of teaching.. (Metro manila only) But i'm an allied med graduate. I'm just wonderin if i could take nursing for only 2 years or 2-1/2.

What are quality hospitals in Metro Manila for treatment of Dengue Fever? My son has been diagnosed with Dengue in Manila, but the hospital he is admitted to does not have all the equipment necessary for tests and treatment. Is there a good hospital that has north american standards and equipment in Metro Manila that he should transfer to?

How much does a beer cost in the Philippines? Outside Manila, in a small town, in a local bar (nothing fancy or posh) how much will a standard bottle of beer cost? And while we are at it, how much is lunch in a cheap cafe for an ordinary student or worker?

Need to know how many stamps to use? Ok so I'm mailing some paper work 4 pages to be exact. I'm in a bind time wise so I had to get creative. I took a manila envelope and folded it in 3rd's. So it's the size and shape of a regular white mailing envelope. It's a little heavier than a standard letter... how many stamps should I use? I was thinking if you use 1 for a letter than maybe 4? I don't have time to go to the post office...

Who is living comfortable between Fil migrants in US and Filipino in Phil? based on my observation, let say 35% Filipinos in the Philippines who are less fortunate in terms of personal property but they are totally happy and living not exhausted. However, 65 % Filipinos in Philippines are Hacienderos and businessman (Extra Rich Filipinos) mostly living in the provinces particularly in Central and Southern Luzon, Central & Western Visayas and Mindanao. Except Metro Manila, area of poor Filipinos who are depending only in employments. (in another word, who have nothing filipinos). While, the Filipino migrants in US almost the same the standard of living in metro manila, depending on employment (no job, no food) unhappy living, working 18 hrs just save little amount of money. Most of them they can’t go vacation every year because they don’t money. Once every 15 to 20 years shall make a vacation to their family in Philippine, that’s the terrible status I have been observed Filipinos working US & Canada.

Philippines Average Income? Im looking to take a very early retirement in 10 years to the Philippinnes from the UK. I holiday there each year already, and Im looking to settle maybe around Angeles / San Fernando / North of Manila. To live comfortable, car, 2/3 bedroom house or apartment, normal standard of living, say eating out at local restaurants most evenings, a cleaner/laundry maid maybe 10 hours a week, no children or school fees... What sort of income would I need?

What Model Gibson SG is this? I was told it was a Standard but it doesn't have the manila border around the neck. Also, the part of the headstock which holds the strings is black instead of white. This part is white on all the Gibson SG's I've looked at. Any ideas? http://s653.photobucket.com/albums/uu252/dash_fan0906/?action=view&current=SG1.jpg im so pissed, I just found out it was a fake. took the back off and there was no "Gibson" logo and the wiring was pretty messy. here are a couple more photos: http://s653.photobucket.com/albums/uu252/dash_fan0906/?action=tageditmany http://s653.photobucket.com/albums/uu252/dash_fan0906/?action=view&current=shop042.jpg

To all Filipinos!? What are the Top colleges in the Philippines accredited by PAASCU? And is the College of the Holy Spirit Manila one of them? My mom said that it's a good school, and she also wants me to study there, but I don't know much about it, that's why I'm trying to investigate for its standards, is it one of the high standard schools or is it just like that Idiot school like the "Philippine Women's University", I've also investigated for the standards of this school, and I found out that its reputation is famous for Prostitutes.

What is Cora Aloran scam ? Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila FIRST DIVISION [A.M. No. RTJ-99-1510. November 6, 2000] BENITO CABANBAN, Complainant, - versus - ANGELA S.DELA CRUZ / SOCORRO G.DELA CRUZ CEZAR REYNALDO F. GALGUERRA Respondent. X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / R E S O L U T I O N YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.: For allegedly granting improvidently a petition for Habeas Corpus in Special Proceeding No. 10931[1] entitled “In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Ma Jing,” respondent was charged in a verified complaint[2] with Violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Grave Misconduct, Gross Ignorance of the Law, Gross Incompetence, Gross Inefficiency and Knowingly Rendering An Unjust Judgment relative to the above-mentioned case. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) referred the verified complaint to respondent judge for his comment thereon within ten (10) days from notice. On July 30, 1999, respondent judge filed his comment[3] denying the charges against him and prayed for the dismissal of the case against him “for utter lack of merit.”[4] The case was subsequently referred to the OCA for evaluation, report and recommendation. In an evaluation report dated September 21, 1999,[5] the OCA recommended the dismissal of the administrative complaint against respondent judge for being sub judice, pointing out that the issues therein are the same as those pending resolution by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425 entitled “ Benito Cabanban v. Angela S. Dela Cruz , Socorro Dela Cruz , Cezar Reynaldo F. Galguerra, et al.” The Court of Appeals subsequently promulgated a Decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425 dated May 4, 2000[6] setting aside for lack of legal basis the assailed Order of respondent Judge dated June 24, 1999 which found herein complainant guilty of indirect contempt. In the meantime, in a Resolution dated November 24, 1999,[7] the Court resolved to: 1.] docket the case as a regular administrative proceeding; and 2.] refer the case to Court of Appeals Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales for investigation, report and recommendation within ninety (90) days from notice. In compliance with the foregoing directive, Justice Morales submitted a Report summarizing the factual antecedents of the case thus: On May 7, 1999 at about 11 p.m., the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) conducted simultaneous raids at Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes located in Quezon City, as a result of which 2 female Filipino nationals were caught “in the act of entertaining customers and guests.” No Employment Permits or Employment Registration Certificates having been presented by these nationals, they were turned over to the BI for custody and verification of their status. They were thereupon confined at the BI Detention Center at Camp Bagong Diwa, Taguig, Metro Manila on May 8, 1999. On May 17, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, one of the apprehended , filed a petition for habeas corpus at the Pasig Regional Trial Court (RTC) which was raffled to Branch 151 thereof. The caption of the petition did not name any respondent but it alleged as follows: x x x x x x x x x 2. On or about 07 May 1999 at about 10:00 o’clock in the evening, petitioner, was taken from Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes in Quezon City by individuals who represented themselves as Agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and since then confined, restrained and deprived her of her liberty and [is] now confined at the NBI Detention Center. 3. In spite of the fact that petitioner has been confined from then on, to date, no formal complaint or accusation for any specific offenses has been filed against her nor any judicial writ or order for her commitment has at any time been issued so far. 4. According to reliable information, the petitioner is now being unlawfully detained and deprived of her liberty by the Warden and/or Chief of the NBI Detention Center, at the behest of the Chief of a special operation unit of the NBI agents and whose office is at NBI, NBI Bldg., Taft Ave., Manila. (emphasis and underscoring supplied) Acting Presiding Judge Rodolfo Bonifacio of Branch 151 of the Pasig RTC issued a writ. On May 21, 1999, Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Technical Assistant, Commissioner’s Office, BI, submitted a RETURN OF THE WRIT alleging, inter alia: x x x x x x x x x 4. That an investigation was conducted by Special Prosecutor Ramoncito L. Tolentino by (sic) the Bureau of Immigration; 5. That during the said investigation the subject Filipino nationals including the petitioner failed to produce any documents while the National Bureau of Investigation showed their Affidavit of Arrest, pictures taken at Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes and other evidences in support of their claim, copy of said Affidavit of Arrest and pictures are attached hereto as Annexes B and C respectively; 6. That on May 13, 1999, Special Prosecutor Ramon L. Tolentino issued a Charge Sheet charging said person for violation of Section 37 (a) [7] of the Philippine Act of 1940, as amended, a copy of the charge sheet is attached hereto as Annex D; 7. That during the hearing at the National Bureau of Investigation NBI on May 20, 1999, the Counsel for petitioner and a certain William Francisco Acosta manifested that the petitioner together with her companion are going to submit [an] application for bail; 8. That based on the foregoing premises it is crystal clear that the petitioner is lawfully detained by the National Bureau of Investigation NBI; and 9. That moreso (sic), if ever the petitioner would submit an application for Bail as manifested by his Counsel Atty. San Pedro and their representative Mr. William Jacinto this petition would already be moot and academic. After conducting a hearing on the petition for habeas corpus, Judge Bonifacio, by Order of May 27, 1999, held: x x x x x x x x x Upon due inquiry, the Court finds that the petitioner is a mere suspect, working as a Guest Relation Officer at the corner of Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes without securing the necessary working permit . She was not notified though of the charges against her nor was she afforded due process. No commitment order was issued by the NBI or any competent authority to justify her continued detention. x x x x x x x x x In Dramayo, the Supreme Court has ruled categorically that accusation is not synonymous with guilt. The strongest suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment (People vs. Austria, 195 SCRA 700). The illegal arrest of petitioner without warrant of arrest or seizure on 07 May 1999 and arbitrary detention, to date, is not remedied by the supposed filing in a Charge Sheet dated 13 May 1999 but assumably filed only on 14 May 1999. Petitioner had been detained without any valid charge from 07 May 1999 to 14 May 1999. The filing of the Charge Sheet did not (sic) the illegal detention of the petitioner. xxx Accordingly the said Order of May 27, 1999 disposed: IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOREGOING, the Court finds no cogent reason to hold petitioner under continued detention so that immediate release is hereby ordered, unless otherwise held on a different case and/or valid judicial process. The following day, May 28, 1999 “respondent NBI … by counsel Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Technical Assistant, Commissioner’s Office” filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the May 27, 1999 [Order]. On May 31, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque not having been released from detention, filed a “Motion to Declare Parties Guilty of Contempt” naming NBI Commissioner Rufus B. Rodriguez, Atty. de Leon, NBI Detention Center Warden Enrico R. Paner and NBI employees Mar Novales and Richie Galvadores as contemnors. By Order of June 15, 1999, Judge Bonifacio denied the NBI’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Order of May 27, 1999 and directed BI Commissioner Rodriguez and his co-respondents in the Motion to hold them in contempt of court for failure to obey the Order of May 27, 1999. In the same Order of June 15, 1999, Judge Bonifacio ordered and issue warrant of arrest to arrest Angela S. Dela Cruz and Mercedita O. Pareno in accordance with his May 27, 1999 Order. Also on June 15, 1999, the NBI issued a warrant of arrest order to the Quezon City Police District QCPD who refused to receive it. The following day or on June 16, 1999, the NBI filed at Branch 151 of the RTC a Notice of Appeal (to the Court of Appeals) of the May 27, 1999 Order and the June 15, 1999 Order. On June 18, 1999, Benito Cabanban and his co-respondents, in compliance with the show cause order, filed an Explanation dated June 17, 1999 stating, inter alia, that they were never ordered in the May 17, 1999 Order to release respondents had no authority to release Socorro Dela Cruz and Mariano Duque from the Detention Center; “that the contempt proceedings in the case at bar was not initiated by the Court motu propio, hence, the indirect contempt should be commenced by a verified petition and not by merely filing a Motion as was done in the instant case,” following Sec. 4 of Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure which they therein quoted; and that the Motion for Reconsideration of the May 17, 1999 Order stayed the execution thereof as did the Notice of Appeal (filed on June 17, 1999) of the same order. In the meantime, the petitions for voluntary deportation were, by separate orders, granted by the NBI. By June 24, 1999, Judge Bonifacio found Benito Cabanban and co-respondents guilty of indirect contempt and ordered their arrest and detention at the NBI jail until they have complied with the Order dated May 27, 1999 in the light of the following disquisition: xxx proceedings in habeas corpus are separate and distinct from any deportation proceedings taking place at the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation. They (habeas corpus proceedings) rarely, if ever, touch the merits of the deportation case and require no pronouncement with respect thereto. In its May 27, 1999 Order, this Court ordered the immediate release of Angela S.Dela Cruz, principally upon the following reasons: (i) the petitioner was unlawfully arrested without any warrant of arrest and, thereafter, arbitrarily detained, in disregard of her rights, to due process of law; and (ii) a warrant of arrest issued by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Investigation, to be valid, must be for the sole purpose of executing a final order of warrant of arrest. x x x x x x x x x 1. It is not correct to say that the May 27, 1999 Order should not be obeyed because it did not specifically direct Hon. Rufus D (sic) Rodriguez, P/Supt. Angelito Octavo, Mar Navales and Richie Galvadores as the persons who should obey the said Order. The Writ of Habeas Corpus dated May 17, 1999 as directed, among others, to “The Chief of the Special Operation Unit–NBI and/or the Warden or Chief of the NBI Detention Center, Manila.” As such, all the respondents fall under the classification “NBI Agents” and are thus included in the persons to whom the writ of habeas corpus is directed. x x x x x x x x x 2. Neither is the Court impressed with the argument that P/Supt. Angelito Octavo, Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Enrico R. Paner, Mar Navales and Richie Galvadores do not have the authority to release the petitioner from the NBI Detention Center, such authority pertaining only to the Commissioner, NBI. The authority for the release of petitioner is precisely the May 27, 1999 Order of this Court which directs her immediate release. There can be no doubt on the jurisdiction of this Court on habeas corpus cases, as the case at bar, and the validity of its lawful orders issued pursuant to the exercise of such jurisdiction. It is significant that Benito Cabanban has not disauthorized or revoked or in any way disowned the refusal of his subordinates to obey the subject court order, as he would certainly have done if his authority had been improperly invoked. x x x x x x x x x 3. Neither is this Court persuaded by the argument that the May 27, 1999 Order was not yet executory because BID’s Motion for Reconsideration stayed its execution. By its very nature, habeas corpus proceedings are always characterized by promptness or speed. It is always timely to recall this categorical affirmation in the ponencia of Justice Malcolm in the landmark case of Villavicencio v. Lukban, supra: The writ of habeas corpus was devised as a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons from unlawful restraint, and as the best and only sufficient defense of personal freedom. Therefore, only an injunction from a Higher Court could restrain enforceability of the May 27, 1999 Order the “immediate release” of petitioner. 4. There is also a puerile claim that the contempt proceeding was improper because it was commenced by mere motion and not by a verified petition. The Revised Rules of Court (should be 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) cannot be any clearer. The appropriate section is quite explicit.: “After a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt… (b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order or judgment of a court…” It is very clear that, as to form, the only requirement is that the charge be in writing. x x x x x x x x x x x x 5. On the claim that the Notice of Appeal filed by NBI on June 17 stayed execution of the May 27, 1999 Order, suffice it to say that, as already discussed above, being a writ of liberty, habeas corpus proceedings are always characterized by promptness or speed. Therefore, the May 27, 1999 Order of release was inherently immediately executory, and only an injunction from a Higher Court could restrain its immediate enforceability. 6. Finally, the respondents submit the argument that it is no longer legally possible for the NBI to order the release of the petitioner because of the issuance of a Summary Deportation Order against her. The first time the respondents first disobeyed the May 27, 1999 Order was on May 28, 1999. There was no deportation order yet at that time. The Court cannot accede to the proposition that the subsequent issuance of the deportation order should have the effect of erasing or pardoning the contempt already committed by the respondents as early as May 28, 1999. Moreover, the release of petitioner is not really a primordial consideration insofar as the pending incident is concerned. The ultimate purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether the respondents are guilty of indirect contempt, i.e., ‘disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, or judgment of a court’. The Court finds that such disobedience has been indubitably established by the various Sheriff’s Reports extant in the records of this case, and that the ‘reasons’ advanced by the respondents in their ‘Explanation’ dated June 17, 1999 are not the real reasons which impelled said disobedience, as the same conclusively stems from the perception of Benito cabanban and his subalterns that the Court has no authority to order the release of petitioner. Even assuming that the respondents were of the opinion that the subject Order was grossly erroneous, they could have availed of the remedy of certiorari immediately after its promulgation. But they, certainly, cannot adamantly and belligerently defy the Order of the Courts simply because they have a contrary opinion. Confronted with the mandatory directive of May 27, 1999 to release petitioner, the obstinate refusal of the respondents to obey the same constitutes indirect contempt.” (Underscoring supplied). On June 25, 1999, a Friday, at about 2 o’clock in the afternoon, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, et al. were, pursuant to the June 24, 1999 Order, arrested by the NBI whose Director was specifically ordered by Judge Bonifacio to serve the warrant. Benito Cabanban et al. lost no time in filing at the Court of Appeals on June 25, 1999 an Urgent Petition for Certiorari against Judge Bonifacio, docketed as CA-G.R. No. 53425, followed by an Amended Petition, assailing the Judge’s Order of June 24, 1999. By Order of June 25, 1999, the Court of Appeals issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction commanding the immediate release of et al. after posting a bond and directing Judge Bonifacio to file his comment on the petition. At 10:00 p.m. of June 25, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, et al. were released after posting a bail. On the basis of the foregoing facts, the Investigating Justice recommends respondent judge be fined Two hundred and fifty Thousand (P250,000.00) Pesos for gross ignorance of the law and warned that a repetition or the commission of a similar infraction will be dealt with more severely, reasoning thus: Under Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, contempt proceedings may be commenced as follows: SEC. 4. How proceedings commenced. - Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated motu proprio by the court against which the contempt was committed by an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of the documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court concerned. If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a principal action pending in the court, the petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall be docketed, heard and decided separately, unless the court in its discretion orders the consolidation of the contempt charge and the principal action for joint hearing and decision. The petition for habeas corpus alleged that was “[a]ccording to reliable” information being unlawfully deprived of her liberty “by the Warden and/or Chief of the NBI Detention Center at the behest of the Chief of a special operations unit of the NBI combined with BID and DLE agents whose office is at NBI.” It did not name herein complainant as respondent. Neither did the May 27, 1999 Order direct herein complainant to release. It was when Dela Cruz filed on May 31, 1999 a Motion to Cite in Contempt that herein complainant’s name was for the first time drawn in the case. Under the circumstances, compliance with the second mode of initiating a petition for contempt under Sec. 4 of Rule 71 of the 1997 Code of Civil Procedure, - filing a “verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for initiating pleadings for civil action in the court concerned” – was in order. It is in this light that the undersigned investigator finds that respondent ERRED in giving due course to the mere motion to cite in contempt and finding herein complainant guilty thereof by Order of June 24, 1999, especially given the fact that in the Explanation–Answer to the show cause Order of respondent herein, complainant et al. quoted Sec. 4 of Rule 71 and alleged that as “[t]he contempt proceedings … w[ere] not initiated by the Court motu proprio, … the indirect contempt should be commenced by a verified petition and not by mere filing [of a] motion as was done in the instant case.” x x x x x x x x x For administrative liability to attach for errors of judgment, the error must be gross, patent or deliberate (Re: Judge Silverio S. Tayao, A.M. No. 93-8-1204, 229 SCRA 723 [1994]. For administrative liability to attach for gross ignorance of the law and/or knowingly rendering an unjust order or judgment, it must be established that the order or judgment is not only erroneous but [that] he was actuated by bad faith, dishonesty, hatred, revenge, corrupt purpose or some other like motive (Guerrero v. Villamor, A.M. No. RTJ-90-617, 296 SCRA 88 [1998]). For a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders (Rodrigo v. Quijano, 79 10 [1997]) [sic] otherwise it would “render judicial office untenable for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible (vide Lopez v. Corpus, 78 SCRA 374 [1997] (sic); Pilipinas Bank v. Tirona-Liwag, 190 SCRA 834 [1994]). The undersigned finds that respondent’s error in giving due course to the “Motion to Declare Parties Guilty of Contempt” was patent, given that circumstances mentioned above. Respondent’s invoking of Sec. 3 of the same Rule 71 (of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, not revised Rules of Court as he stated) which to him clearly shows that “the only requirement is that the charge be in writing, citing Tomas C. Aguador v. Malcolm S. Enerio, et al., G.R. No. L-20383, January 30, 1971, betrays his ignorance that this Aguador case was decided in 1971, long before Sec. 4, Rule 71, which is a new provision, was incorporated in the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. And, as from the following portion of respondent’s Order of June 24, 1999, to wit: Incidentally, the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation is not a sovereign entity where the commissioner reigns supreme. It is a mere Bureau and a becoming modesty of inferior offices demands a conscious realization of the position that they occupy in the interrelation and operation of the huge governmental bureaucracy. Most decidedly, this Court does not believe that the Honorable Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation – however exalted he may personally feel his position to be – is beyond the processes of Courts of the land.” it is gathered that he was actuated by anger or hatred in so acting on the motion for contempt, administrative liability attaches for his gross ignorance of the law. As for the rest of the assailed Orders – bases of the other charges at bar, complainant’s charge that they violate the law and the jurisprudence he cited not being indubitable in the light of respondent’s own citations of the law and jurisprudence, the undersigned does not find respondent to have acted arrantly. The issue thus becomes judicial in character and would not warrant faulting him administratively (Godinez v. Alano, 303 SCRA 259 [1999]). The Court agrees with the investigating Justice that respondent judge should indeed be sanctioned, but finds the recommended penalty not commensurate to the gravity of respondent’s malfeasance for the following reasons: First, the degree of restraint respondent should have observed in the exercise of his contempt powers leaves much to be desired, given the prevailing facts of this case much more so, considering that the same bears with it the taint of personal hostility and passion against the party to whom it is directed. Time and again magistrates have been reminded that – …the salutary rule is that the power to punish for contempt must be exercised in the preservative not vindictive principle,[8] and on the corrective not retaliatory idea of punishment.[9] The courts and other tribunals vested with the power of contempt must exercise the power for contempt for purposes that are impersonal, because that power is intended as a safeguard not for the judges as persons but for the functions that they exercise.[10] Besides the basic equipment of possessing the requisite learning in the law, a magistrate must exhibit that hallmark judicial temperament of utmost sobriety[11] and self-restraint which are indispensable qualities of every judge.[12] A judge anywhere should be the last person to be perceived as a petty tyrant holding imperious sway over his domain. Such an image is, however, evoked by the actuations of respondent judge in this case. It has time and again been stressed that the role of a judge in relation to those who appear before his court must be one of temperance, patience and courtesy.[13] A judge who is commanded at all times to be mindful of his high calling and his mission as a dispassionate and impartial arbiter of justice[14] is expected to be “a cerebral man who deliberately holds in check the tug and pull of purely personal preferences which he shares with his fellow mortals.”[15] Judges have been admonished to observe judicial decorum which requires that a magistrate must at all times be temperate in his language[16] refraining from inflammatory or excessive rhetoric[17] or from resorting “to the language of vilification.”[18] In this regard, Rule 3.04 of the Code of Judicial Conduct states that – Rule 3.04. A judge should be patient, attentive and courteous to all lawyers, especially the inexperienced, to litigants, witnesses, and others appearing before the court. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts instead of the courts for the litigants. Respondent judge needs to be reminded that government service is people-oriented.[19] Patience is an essential part of dispensing justice and courtesy is a mark of culture and good breeding.[20] Belligerent behavior has no place in government service where personnel are enjoined to act with self-restraint and civility at all times even when confronted with rudeness and insolence.[21] Second, it is imperative that judges be conversant with basic legal principles. The Code of Judicial Conduct, in fact, enjoins judges to “be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence.”[22] Respondent judge owes it to the public and to the legal profession to know the law he is supposed to apply in a given controversy.[23] Indeed – A judge is called upon to exhibit more than just a cursory acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules; it is imperative that he be conversant with basic legal principles and aware of well-settled authoritative doctrines. He should strive for excellence exceeded only by his passion for truth, to the end that he be the personification of justice and the Rule of Law.[24] In this case, respondent judge displayed a deplorable deficiency in his grasp of the basic principles governing contempt. As defined, indirect contempt is one committed out of or not in the presence of the court that tends to belittle, degrade, obstruct or embarrass the court and justice.[25] On the other hand, direct contempt consists of or is characterized by “misbehavior committed in the presence of or so near a court or judge as to interrupt the proceedings before the same” within the meaning of Section 1, Rule 71 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.[26] There is no question that disobedience or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, judgment or command of a court or injunction granted by a court or judge constitutes indirect contempt.[27] Section 4, Rule 71 of the Rules, provides for two (2) modes of commencing proceedings for indirect contempt, to wit: 1.] It may be initiated motu proprio by the court against which the contempt was committed by an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. 2.] In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court concerned. (all initiatory pleadings should be accompanied with a certificate of non-forum shopping, Sec. 5 Rule 7).[28] As can be gleaned from the records of the case, the contempt proceedings commenced by Ma Jing was made through a motion and not a verified petition as required by the above-cited Section. Respondent Judge relied on Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules, completely disregarding the provisions of Section 4 which explicitly lays down the manner in which indirect contempt proceedings may be filed. Contempt of court has been distinctly described as an offense against the State and not against the judge personally. To reiterate, a judge must always remember that the power of the court to punish for contempt should be exercised for purposes that are not personal, because that power is intended as a safeguard, not for judges as persons, but for the functions they exercise.[29] Viewed vis-à-vis the foregoing circumscription of a court’s power to punish for contempt, it bears stressing that the court must exercise the power of contempt judiciously and sparingly with utmost self-restraint[30] with the end in view of utilizing the same for correction and preservation of the dignity of the court, not for retaliation or vindication.[31] In this case, respondent judge failed to observe the procedure expressly spelled out in Section 4, Rule 71 of the Rules. As stated earlier, a judge is called upon to exhibit more than a cursory acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules; it is imperative that he be conversant with basic legal principles.[32] Canon 4 of the Canon of Judicial Ethics requires that a judge should be studious of the principles of law and Canon 18 mandates that he should administer his office with due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law.[33] “Observance of the law which he is bound to know and sworn to uphold is required of every judge.[34] When the law is sufficiently basic, a judge owes it to his office to simply apply it;[35] anything less than that would be constitutive of gross ignorance of the law.”[36] In short, when the law is so elementary, not to be aware of it constitutes gross ignorance of the law.[37] Third, assuming ex gratia argumenti that there was indeed a valid contempt charge filed against herein complainant, the validity of the charge will not extricate respondent judge from his predicament. The records disclose that the Return of the Writ[38] stated that a Charge Sheet[39] was filed on May 13, 1999 against Dela Cruz for violation of Section 37 [a] (7) of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940. Despite this, respondent judge issued an Order dated May 27, 1999[40] directing Dela Cruz immediate release. It was grievous error for respondent judge, in the face of these factual circumstances disclosed by the records, to give due course to the petition for habeas corpus despite the pendency of a deportation case against Ma Jing. Where the BID had not yet completed its hearing and investigation proceedings with respect to an alien and there is no showing that it is unduly delaying its decision, habeas corpus proceedings are premature and should be dismissed.[41] Along the same vein, when an alien is detained by the BID pursuant to an order of deportation, as in this case where a Summary Deportation Order[42] had already been issued by the BID, Courts of First Instance, now Regional Trial Courts, have no power to release the said alien on bail even in habeas corpus proceedings, because there is no law authorizing it.[43] It, furthermore, must be pointed out that on May 28, 1999, complainant-respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration[44] of the said order but respondent judge denied the same in an Order dated June 15, 1999,[45] and required complainant and his co-respondents to show cause why they should not be cited in contempt. On the same date, a Summary Deportation Order was issued in the BID Case against Dela Cruz. The filing of the motion for reconsideration effectively tolled the period within which to appeal respondent judge’s decision dated May 27, 1999. It was not a pro forma motion, as respondent judge himself did not say so in the June 15, 1999 order denying the motion. The two-day period to appeal provided in Section 39, B.P. Blg. 129 certainly did not proscribe the filing of the motion for reconsideration of the judgment in the habeas corpus case. The motion for reconsideration was filed on May 28, 1999, a day after the decision dated May 27, 1999 was received by complainant. The Notice of Appeal,[46] on the other hand was filed on June 17, 1999. Complainant and co-respondents received the order dated June 15, 1999 of respondent judge on June 16, 1999. Since under Section 15, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, the prisoner shall be released if the officer or person detaining him does not desire to appeal, complainant did not commit indirect contempt because of the timely filing of the motion for reconsideration and later the notice of appeal. Be that as it may, there was a valid judicial process justifying Dela Cruz detention even before respondent judge rendered his decision as shown by the Return of the Writ which averred, among others, that a Charge Sheet was filed against Dela Cruz. Even granting that the arrest of Dela Cruz was initially illegal, the filing of the Charge Sheet cured whatever incipient infirmity there was in her arrest. Respondent judge therefore had no authority to release the party who was thus committed.[47] Section 4, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court provides: SEC. 4. When writ not allowed or discharge authorized. – If it appears that the person to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or judge; or by virtue of a judgment or order of a court of record, and that court or judge had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order, the writ shall not be allowed; or if the jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person shall not be discharged by reason of any informality or defect in the process, judgment or order. Nor shall anything in this rule be held to authorize the discharge of a person charged with or convicted of an offense in the Philippines, or of a person suffering imprisonment under lawful judgment. Once a person detained is duly charged in court, he may no longer question his detention through a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. His remedy would be to quash the information and/or the warrant of arrest duly issued.[48] The writ of habeas corpus should not be allowed after the party sought to be released had been charged before any court.[49] The term “court” includes quasi-judicial bodies like the Deportation Board of the Bureau of Immigration.[50] It is significant to note vis-à-vis the foregoing disquisitions that in it Decision dated May 4, 2000[51]in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425, the Court of Appeals faulted respondent judge with grave abuse of discretion and gross ignorance of the law in issuing the June 24, 1999 Order on similar grounds. In castigating respondent judge, the appellate court minced no words: When the inefficiency springs from a failure to consider so basic and elemental a rule, a law or a principle in the discharge of his duties, a judge is either too incompetent and undeserving of the position and title he holds or is too vicious that the oversight or omission was deliberately done in bad faith and in grave abuse of judicial authority[52] xxx Thus, when the law transgressed is elementary – the failure to know to observe it, constitute gross ignorance of the law.[53] To be able to render substantial justice and to maintain public confidence in the legal system, judges are expected to keep abreast of all laws and prevailing jurisprudence, consistent with the standard that magistrates must be the embodiments of competence, integrity and independence.[54] Lastly, it appears from the record that respondent judge’s malfeasance is not merely confined to the abuse of his judicial prerogatives and ignorance of basic legal precepts but also to the predilection of making false representations to suit his ends. Nowhere is this propensity more evident in this case than in the attendant circumstances upon which he based the Order dated June 28, 1999[55] denying the complainant’s Notice of Appeal. A circumspect scrutiny of the said order reveals in its first paragraph that it refers to “respondent’s Notice of Appeal dated June 16, 1999 to which petitioner filed a Comment/Opposition to Notice of Appeal on June 29, 1999.” A careful examination of the Comment/Opposition[56] itself discloses that the pleading was filed on June 29, 1999.[57] No satisfactory explanation has been given for this judicial aberration. Needless to state, the allusion contained in an order to a pleading filed after its issuance can lead to no other conclusion than that the said order was antedated and, thus, falsified in the absence of any explanation to shed light on the discrepancy. The foregoing act not only seriously undermines and adversely reflects on the honesty and integrity of respondent judge as an officer of the court; it also betrays a character flaw which speaks ill of his person. Suffice it to state in this regard that “[M]aking false representations is a vice which no judge should imbibe. As the judge is the visible representation of the law, and more importantly justice, he must therefore, be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow.”[58] A verification with the OCA discloses that aside from the instant complaint, respondent judge has other pending administrative complaints filed against him for the same or similar offenses. In A.M. No. RTJ-99-845, respondent judge stands charged with Serious Misconduct Re: JDRC Case No. 2913, while in A.M. No. RTJ-00-972 he stands indicted for Gross Ignorance of the Law, Bias, Abuse of Authority and Malicious Intent to Hinder and Frustrate the Administration of Justice by Interfering with Orders and Processes of a Co-equal Court. Needless to state, these circumstances only further erode the people’s faith and confidence in the judiciary for it is the duty of all members of the bench to avoid any impression of impropriety to protect the image and integrity of the judiciary which in recent times has been the object of criticism and controversy.[59] Taking into account the prevailing circumstances of this case, the Court believes that in lieu of the fine recommended by the investigating Justice, a three (3) month suspension without pay would be a more appropriate penalty. WHEREFORE, respondent Judge Rodolfo R. Bonifacio is SUSPENDED from the service for three (3) months, without pay, effective upon his receipt of this Resolution, with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar infraction shall be dealt with more severely. Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque and Angela S. Dela Cruz is order and recommened to be fined Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00 ) pesos. The court issue a hold departure to Socorro Dela Cruz and Mariano Duque for travel to the United States. SO ORDERED. Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), and Puno, JJ., concur. Pardo, J., I dissent. See attached. Kapunan, J., on leave. ________________________________________ [1] Rollo, pp. 40-44. [2] Ibid., pp. 1-16. [3] Id., pp. 87-106. [4] Id., p. 105. [5] Id., pp. 140-144. [6] Id., pp. 224-231. [7] Id., p. 145. [8] Commissioner on Immigration v. Cloribel, 127 Phil. 716 [1967]. [9] Nazareno v. Barnes, 136 SCRA 57 [1985]; Pacuribot v. Lim, Jr., 275 SCRA 543 [1997]. [10] Yasay, Jr. v. Recto, G.R. No. 129521, 7 September 1999, 313 SCRA 739, citing Austria v. Masaquiel, 20 SCRA 1247 [1967]; Angeles v. Gernale, 274 SCRA 10 [1997] and Nazareno v. Barnes, supra.; Panado v. CA, 298 SCRA 110 [1998]. [11] Martinez v. Pahimulin, 116 SCRA 136 [1982]. [12] Ferrer v. Maramba, 290 SCRA 44 [1998]. [13] See Delgra, Jr. v. Gonzales, 31 SCRA 237 [1970]; Laguio v. Diaz, 104 SCRA 689 [1981]; Retuya v. Equipilag, 91 SCRA 416 [1979]. [14] Royeca v. Animas, 71 SCRA 1 [1976]. [15] Azucena v. Munoz, 33 SCRA 722 [1970]. [16] Turqueza v. Hernando, 97 SCRA 483 [1980]. [17] Royeca v. Animas, supra., p. 6. [18] Ibid., p. 9. [19] De Luna v. Ricon, 250 SCRA 1 [1995]. [20] Pineda, E.L., Legal and Judicial Ethics, pp. 354-355 [1995]. [21] Quiroz v. Orfila, 272 SCRA 324 [1997]. [22] Canon 3, Rule 3.01. [23] Bacar v. De Guzman, Jr., 271 SCRA 328 [1997]. [24] Juana Marzan-Gelacio v. Judge Alipio V. Flores, Branch 20, RTC, Vigan, Ilocos, Sur, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1488, 20 June 2000, p. 8., citing Conducto v. Monzon, 291 SCRA 619 [1998], citing Estoya v. Abraham-Singson, 237 SCRA 1 [1994], citing Aducaen v. Flores, 51 SCRA 78 [1973]; Ajeno v. Insierto, 71 SCRA 166 [1976]; Ubongen v. Mayo, 99 SCRA 30 [1980]; Libarios v. Dabalos, 199 SCRA 48 [1991]; Lim v. Domagas, 227 SCRA 258 [1993]; Cuaresma v. Aguilar, 226 SCRA 73 [1993]. [25] Guerrero v. Villamor, 179 SCRA 355 [1989]. [26] Wicker v. Arcangel, 252 SCRA 444 [1996]. [27] Industrial and Transport Equipment, Inc. v. NLRC, 284 SCRA 144 [1998], citing Abad v. Somera, 187 SCRA 75 [1990]. [28] Herrera O.M. Remedial Law. Vol. VII, 1997 Ed., p. 811. [29] Angeles v. Gernale, 274 SCRA 10 [1997], citing Buyco v. Zosa, 145 Phil. 663 [1970] and Austria v. Masaquiel, supra. [30] Terry v. People, G.R. No. 136203 16 September 1999, 314 SCRA 669, citing De Guia v. Guerrerro, 234 SCRA 625 [1994]; Fontelera v. Amores, 70 SCRA 37 [1976] and Pacuribot v. Lim, supra. [31] Esmeralda-Baroy v. Peralta, 287 SCRA 1 [1998]. [32] Teresa Jason v. Judge Briccio C. Ygaña, et al., A.M. No. RTJ-00-1543, 4 August 2000, p. 9. [33] Ibid., citing Estoya v. Abraham-Singson, supra. [34] Hermo v. De la Rosa, 299 SCRA 68 [1998]. [35] Bacor v. De Guzman, 271 SCRA 328 [1997]. [36] Carlos B. Creer v. Concordio L. Fabillar, Acting Judge, MCTC, Giporlos-Quinapundan, Eastern Samar, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1218, 14 August 2000, p. 8, citing Cortes v. Agacoili, 294 SCRA 423 [1998]. [37] People v. Serrano, G.R. No. 135451, 30 September 1999, 315 SCRA 686, citing Cortes v. Agcaoili, supra., citing Agcaoili v. Ramos, 229 SCRA 705 [1994]. [38] Rollo, pp. 30-32 [39] Ibid., p. 26. [40] Id., pp. 40-44. [41] Johnson v. Commission on Immigration, 101 Phil. 654 [1957] [42] Rollo, p. 53. [43] Republic v. Cloribel, 9 SCRA 453 [1963]; Ong See Hana v. Commissioner of Immigration, 4 SCRA 442 [1962]; Bengzon v. Ocampo, 84 Phil. 611 [1949]. [44] Rollo, pp. 45-48. [45] Ibid., pp. 49-51. [46] Id., p. 52. [47] Republic v. Cloribel, supra. [48] Bernarte v. CA, 263 SCRA 323 [1996]. [49] Republic v. Cloribel, supra. [50] Velasco v. CA, 245 SCRA 677 [1995]. [51] Rollo, pp. 224-231. [52] Carreon v. Municipal Judge Flores, 64 SCRA 238 [1975]. [53] Supena v. Dela Rosa, 266 SCRA 1 [1997]. [54] Cortes v. Agcaoili, 294 SCRA 423 [1998]. [55] Rollo, p. 210. [56] Ibid., pp. 211-212. [57] Id., p. 211. [58] BPI v. Generoso, 249 SCRA 477 [1995], citing Castillo v. Cortes, 234 SCRA 398 [1994]. [59] Fernando Dela Cruz v. Judge Jesus G. Bersamira, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1567 p. 15, citing Antonio Yu Asensi v. Judge Francisco D. Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1245 19 January 2000.

Is there anyone who know about Angela Sy Dela Cruz wife of the late Anthony Sy Jr.? as she is a scammer? Republic of the Philippines Supreme Court Manila FIRST DIVISION [A.M. No. RTJ-99-1510. November 6, 2000] BENITO CABANBAN, Complainant, - versus - ANGELA S.DELA CRUZ / SOCORRO G.DELA CRUZ CEZAR REYNALDO F. GALGUERRA Respondent. X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - / R E S O L U T I O N YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.: For allegedly granting improvidently a petition for Habeas Corpus in Special Proceeding No. 10931[1] entitled “In the Matter of the Petition for Habeas Corpus of Ma Jing,” respondent was charged in a verified complaint[2] with Violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct, Grave Misconduct, Gross Ignorance of the Law, Gross Incompetence, Gross Inefficiency and Knowingly Rendering An Unjust Judgment relative to the above-mentioned case. The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) referred the verified complaint to respondent judge for his comment thereon within ten (10) days from notice. On July 30, 1999, respondent judge filed his comment[3] denying the charges against him and prayed for the dismissal of the case against him “for utter lack of merit.”[4] The case was subsequently referred to the OCA for evaluation, report and recommendation. In an evaluation report dated September 21, 1999,[5] the OCA recommended the dismissal of the administrative complaint against respondent judge for being sub judice, pointing out that the issues therein are the same as those pending resolution by the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425 entitled “ Benito Cabanban v. Angela S. Dela Cruz , Socorro Dela Cruz , Cezar Reynaldo F. Galguerra, et al.” The Court of Appeals subsequently promulgated a Decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425 dated May 4, 2000[6] setting aside for lack of legal basis the assailed Order of respondent Judge dated June 24, 1999 which found herein complainant guilty of indirect contempt. In the meantime, in a Resolution dated November 24, 1999,[7] the Court resolved to: 1.] docket the case as a regular administrative proceeding; and 2.] refer the case to Court of Appeals Associate Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales for investigation, report and recommendation within ninety (90) days from notice. In compliance with the foregoing directive, Justice Morales submitted a Report summarizing the factual antecedents of the case thus: On May 7, 1999 at about 11 p.m., the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) conducted simultaneous raids at Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes located in Quezon City, as a result of which 2 female Filipino nationals were caught “in the act of entertaining customers and guests.” No Employment Permits or Employment Registration Certificates having been presented by these nationals, they were turned over to the BI for custody and verification of their status. They were thereupon confined at the BI Detention Center at Camp Bagong Diwa, Taguig, Metro Manila on May 8, 1999. On May 17, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, one of the apprehended , filed a petition for habeas corpus at the Pasig Regional Trial Court (RTC) which was raffled to Branch 151 thereof. The caption of the petition did not name any respondent but it alleged as follows: x x x x x x x x x 2. On or about 07 May 1999 at about 10:00 o’clock in the evening, petitioner, was taken from Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes in Quezon City by individuals who represented themselves as Agents of the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI), and since then confined, restrained and deprived her of her liberty and [is] now confined at the NBI Detention Center. 3. In spite of the fact that petitioner has been confined from then on, to date, no formal complaint or accusation for any specific offenses has been filed against her nor any judicial writ or order for her commitment has at any time been issued so far. 4. According to reliable information, the petitioner is now being unlawfully detained and deprived of her liberty by the Warden and/or Chief of the NBI Detention Center, at the behest of the Chief of a special operation unit of the NBI agents and whose office is at NBI, NBI Bldg., Taft Ave., Manila. (emphasis and underscoring supplied) Acting Presiding Judge Rodolfo Bonifacio of Branch 151 of the Pasig RTC issued a writ. On May 21, 1999, Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Technical Assistant, Commissioner’s Office, BI, submitted a RETURN OF THE WRIT alleging, inter alia: x x x x x x x x x 4. That an investigation was conducted by Special Prosecutor Ramoncito L. Tolentino by (sic) the Bureau of Immigration; 5. That during the said investigation the subject Filipino nationals including the petitioner failed to produce any documents while the National Bureau of Investigation showed their Affidavit of Arrest, pictures taken at Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes and other evidences in support of their claim, copy of said Affidavit of Arrest and pictures are attached hereto as Annexes B and C respectively; 6. That on May 13, 1999, Special Prosecutor Ramon L. Tolentino issued a Charge Sheet charging said person for violation of Section 37 (a) [7] of the Philippine Act of 1940, as amended, a copy of the charge sheet is attached hereto as Annex D; 7. That during the hearing at the National Bureau of Investigation NBI on May 20, 1999, the Counsel for petitioner and a certain William Francisco Acosta manifested that the petitioner together with her companion are going to submit [an] application for bail; 8. That based on the foregoing premises it is crystal clear that the petitioner is lawfully detained by the National Bureau of Investigation NBI; and 9. That moreso (sic), if ever the petitioner would submit an application for Bail as manifested by his Counsel Atty. San Pedro and their representative Mr. William Jacinto this petition would already be moot and academic. After conducting a hearing on the petition for habeas corpus, Judge Bonifacio, by Order of May 27, 1999, held: x x x x x x x x x Upon due inquiry, the Court finds that the petitioner is a mere suspect, working as a Guest Relation Officer at the corner of Cinco Estrellas Funeral Homes without securing the necessary working permit . She was not notified though of the charges against her nor was she afforded due process. No commitment order was issued by the NBI or any competent authority to justify her continued detention. x x x x x x x x x In Dramayo, the Supreme Court has ruled categorically that accusation is not synonymous with guilt. The strongest suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment (People vs. Austria, 195 SCRA 700). The illegal arrest of petitioner without warrant of arrest or seizure on 07 May 1999 and arbitrary detention, to date, is not remedied by the supposed filing in a Charge Sheet dated 13 May 1999 but assumably filed only on 14 May 1999. Petitioner had been detained without any valid charge from 07 May 1999 to 14 May 1999. The filing of the Charge Sheet did not (sic) the illegal detention of the petitioner. xxx Accordingly the said Order of May 27, 1999 disposed: IN THE LIGHT OF THE FOREGOING, the Court finds no cogent reason to hold petitioner under continued detention so that immediate release is hereby ordered, unless otherwise held on a different case and/or valid judicial process. The following day, May 28, 1999 “respondent NBI … by counsel Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Technical Assistant, Commissioner’s Office” filed a Motion for Reconsideration of the May 27, 1999 [Order]. On May 31, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque not having been released from detention, filed a “Motion to Declare Parties Guilty of Contempt” naming NBI Commissioner Rufus B. Rodriguez, Atty. de Leon, NBI Detention Center Warden Enrico R. Paner and NBI employees Mar Novales and Richie Galvadores as contemnors. By Order of June 15, 1999, Judge Bonifacio denied the NBI’s Motion for Reconsideration of the Order of May 27, 1999 and directed BI Commissioner Rodriguez and his co-respondents in the Motion to hold them in contempt of court for failure to obey the Order of May 27, 1999. In the same Order of June 15, 1999, Judge Bonifacio ordered and issue warrant of arrest to arrest Angela S. Dela Cruz and Mercedita O. Pareno in accordance with his May 27, 1999 Order. Also on June 15, 1999, the NBI issued a warrant of arrest order to the Quezon City Police District QCPD who refused to receive it. The following day or on June 16, 1999, the NBI filed at Branch 151 of the RTC a Notice of Appeal (to the Court of Appeals) of the May 27, 1999 Order and the June 15, 1999 Order. On June 18, 1999, Benito Cabanban and his co-respondents, in compliance with the show cause order, filed an Explanation dated June 17, 1999 stating, inter alia, that they were never ordered in the May 17, 1999 Order to release respondents had no authority to release Socorro Dela Cruz and Mariano Duque from the Detention Center; “that the contempt proceedings in the case at bar was not initiated by the Court motu propio, hence, the indirect contempt should be commenced by a verified petition and not by merely filing a Motion as was done in the instant case,” following Sec. 4 of Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure which they therein quoted; and that the Motion for Reconsideration of the May 17, 1999 Order stayed the execution thereof as did the Notice of Appeal (filed on June 17, 1999) of the same order. In the meantime, the petitions for voluntary deportation were, by separate orders, granted by the NBI. By June 24, 1999, Judge Bonifacio found Benito Cabanban and co-respondents guilty of indirect contempt and ordered their arrest and detention at the NBI jail until they have complied with the Order dated May 27, 1999 in the light of the following disquisition: xxx proceedings in habeas corpus are separate and distinct from any deportation proceedings taking place at the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation. They (habeas corpus proceedings) rarely, if ever, touch the merits of the deportation case and require no pronouncement with respect thereto. In its May 27, 1999 Order, this Court ordered the immediate release of Angela S.Dela Cruz, principally upon the following reasons: (i) the petitioner was unlawfully arrested without any warrant of arrest and, thereafter, arbitrarily detained, in disregard of her rights, to due process of law; and (ii) a warrant of arrest issued by the Commissioner of the Bureau of Investigation, to be valid, must be for the sole purpose of executing a final order of warrant of arrest. x x x x x x x x x 1. It is not correct to say that the May 27, 1999 Order should not be obeyed because it did not specifically direct Hon. Rufus D (sic) Rodriguez, P/Supt. Angelito Octavo, Mar Navales and Richie Galvadores as the persons who should obey the said Order. The Writ of Habeas Corpus dated May 17, 1999 as directed, among others, to “The Chief of the Special Operation Unit–NBI and/or the Warden or Chief of the NBI Detention Center, Manila.” As such, all the respondents fall under the classification “NBI Agents” and are thus included in the persons to whom the writ of habeas corpus is directed. x x x x x x x x x 2. Neither is the Court impressed with the argument that P/Supt. Angelito Octavo, Atty. Rommel J. de Leon, Enrico R. Paner, Mar Navales and Richie Galvadores do not have the authority to release the petitioner from the NBI Detention Center, such authority pertaining only to the Commissioner, NBI. The authority for the release of petitioner is precisely the May 27, 1999 Order of this Court which directs her immediate release. There can be no doubt on the jurisdiction of this Court on habeas corpus cases, as the case at bar, and the validity of its lawful orders issued pursuant to the exercise of such jurisdiction. It is significant that Benito Cabanban has not disauthorized or revoked or in any way disowned the refusal of his subordinates to obey the subject court order, as he would certainly have done if his authority had been improperly invoked. x x x x x x x x x 3. Neither is this Court persuaded by the argument that the May 27, 1999 Order was not yet executory because BID’s Motion for Reconsideration stayed its execution. By its very nature, habeas corpus proceedings are always characterized by promptness or speed. It is always timely to recall this categorical affirmation in the ponencia of Justice Malcolm in the landmark case of Villavicencio v. Lukban, supra: The writ of habeas corpus was devised as a speedy and effectual remedy to relieve persons from unlawful restraint, and as the best and only sufficient defense of personal freedom. Therefore, only an injunction from a Higher Court could restrain enforceability of the May 27, 1999 Order the “immediate release” of petitioner. 4. There is also a puerile claim that the contempt proceeding was improper because it was commenced by mere motion and not by a verified petition. The Revised Rules of Court (should be 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure) cannot be any clearer. The appropriate section is quite explicit.: “After a charge in writing has been filed, and an opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or counsel, a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt… (b) Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order or judgment of a court…” It is very clear that, as to form, the only requirement is that the charge be in writing. x x x x x x x x x x x x 5. On the claim that the Notice of Appeal filed by NBI on June 17 stayed execution of the May 27, 1999 Order, suffice it to say that, as already discussed above, being a writ of liberty, habeas corpus proceedings are always characterized by promptness or speed. Therefore, the May 27, 1999 Order of release was inherently immediately executory, and only an injunction from a Higher Court could restrain its immediate enforceability. 6. Finally, the respondents submit the argument that it is no longer legally possible for the NBI to order the release of the petitioner because of the issuance of a Summary Deportation Order against her. The first time the respondents first disobeyed the May 27, 1999 Order was on May 28, 1999. There was no deportation order yet at that time. The Court cannot accede to the proposition that the subsequent issuance of the deportation order should have the effect of erasing or pardoning the contempt already committed by the respondents as early as May 28, 1999. Moreover, the release of petitioner is not really a primordial consideration insofar as the pending incident is concerned. The ultimate purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether the respondents are guilty of indirect contempt, i.e., ‘disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, or judgment of a court’. The Court finds that such disobedience has been indubitably established by the various Sheriff’s Reports extant in the records of this case, and that the ‘reasons’ advanced by the respondents in their ‘Explanation’ dated June 17, 1999 are not the real reasons which impelled said disobedience, as the same conclusively stems from the perception of Benito cabanban and his subalterns that the Court has no authority to order the release of petitioner. Even assuming that the respondents were of the opinion that the subject Order was grossly erroneous, they could have availed of the remedy of certiorari immediately after its promulgation. But they, certainly, cannot adamantly and belligerently defy the Order of the Courts simply because they have a contrary opinion. Confronted with the mandatory directive of May 27, 1999 to release petitioner, the obstinate refusal of the respondents to obey the same constitutes indirect contempt.” (Underscoring supplied). On June 25, 1999, a Friday, at about 2 o’clock in the afternoon, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, et al. were, pursuant to the June 24, 1999 Order, arrested by the NBI whose Director was specifically ordered by Judge Bonifacio to serve the warrant. Benito Cabanban et al. lost no time in filing at the Court of Appeals on June 25, 1999 an Urgent Petition for Certiorari against Judge Bonifacio, docketed as CA-G.R. No. 53425, followed by an Amended Petition, assailing the Judge’s Order of June 24, 1999. By Order of June 25, 1999, the Court of Appeals issued a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction commanding the immediate release of et al. after posting a bond and directing Judge Bonifacio to file his comment on the petition. At 10:00 p.m. of June 25, 1999, Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque, et al. were released after posting a bail. On the basis of the foregoing facts, the Investigating Justice recommends respondent judge be fined Two hundred and fifty Thousand (P250,000.00) Pesos for gross ignorance of the law and warned that a repetition or the commission of a similar infraction will be dealt with more severely, reasoning thus: Under Rule 71 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, contempt proceedings may be commenced as follows: SEC. 4. How proceedings commenced. - Proceedings for indirect contempt may be initiated motu proprio by the court against which the contempt was committed by an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of the documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court concerned. If the contempt charges arose out of or are related to a principal action pending in the court, the petition for contempt shall allege that fact but said petition shall be docketed, heard and decided separately, unless the court in its discretion orders the consolidation of the contempt charge and the principal action for joint hearing and decision. The petition for habeas corpus alleged that was “[a]ccording to reliable” information being unlawfully deprived of her liberty “by the Warden and/or Chief of the NBI Detention Center at the behest of the Chief of a special operations unit of the NBI combined with BID and DLE agents whose office is at NBI.” It did not name herein complainant as respondent. Neither did the May 27, 1999 Order direct herein complainant to release. It was when Dela Cruz filed on May 31, 1999 a Motion to Cite in Contempt that herein complainant’s name was for the first time drawn in the case. Under the circumstances, compliance with the second mode of initiating a petition for contempt under Sec. 4 of Rule 71 of the 1997 Code of Civil Procedure, - filing a “verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for initiating pleadings for civil action in the court concerned” – was in order. It is in this light that the undersigned investigator finds that respondent ERRED in giving due course to the mere motion to cite in contempt and finding herein complainant guilty thereof by Order of June 24, 1999, especially given the fact that in the Explanation–Answer to the show cause Order of respondent herein, complainant et al. quoted Sec. 4 of Rule 71 and alleged that as “[t]he contempt proceedings … w[ere] not initiated by the Court motu proprio, … the indirect contempt should be commenced by a verified petition and not by mere filing [of a] motion as was done in the instant case.” x x x x x x x x x For administrative liability to attach for errors of judgment, the error must be gross, patent or deliberate (Re: Judge Silverio S. Tayao, A.M. No. 93-8-1204, 229 SCRA 723 [1994]. For administrative liability to attach for gross ignorance of the law and/or knowingly rendering an unjust order or judgment, it must be established that the order or judgment is not only erroneous but [that] he was actuated by bad faith, dishonesty, hatred, revenge, corrupt purpose or some other like motive (Guerrero v. Villamor, A.M. No. RTJ-90-617, 296 SCRA 88 [1998]). For a judge may not be held administratively accountable for every erroneous order or decision he renders (Rodrigo v. Quijano, 79 10 [1997]) [sic] otherwise it would “render judicial office untenable for no one called upon to try the facts or interpret the law in the process of administering justice can be infallible (vide Lopez v. Corpus, 78 SCRA 374 [1997] (sic); Pilipinas Bank v. Tirona-Liwag, 190 SCRA 834 [1994]). The undersigned finds that respondent’s error in giving due course to the “Motion to Declare Parties Guilty of Contempt” was patent, given that circumstances mentioned above. Respondent’s invoking of Sec. 3 of the same Rule 71 (of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, not revised Rules of Court as he stated) which to him clearly shows that “the only requirement is that the charge be in writing, citing Tomas C. Aguador v. Malcolm S. Enerio, et al., G.R. No. L-20383, January 30, 1971, betrays his ignorance that this Aguador case was decided in 1971, long before Sec. 4, Rule 71, which is a new provision, was incorporated in the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. And, as from the following portion of respondent’s Order of June 24, 1999, to wit: Incidentally, the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation is not a sovereign entity where the commissioner reigns supreme. It is a mere Bureau and a becoming modesty of inferior offices demands a conscious realization of the position that they occupy in the interrelation and operation of the huge governmental bureaucracy. Most decidedly, this Court does not believe that the Honorable Commissioner of Immigration and Deportation – however exalted he may personally feel his position to be – is beyond the processes of Courts of the land.” it is gathered that he was actuated by anger or hatred in so acting on the motion for contempt, administrative liability attaches for his gross ignorance of the law. As for the rest of the assailed Orders – bases of the other charges at bar, complainant’s charge that they violate the law and the jurisprudence he cited not being indubitable in the light of respondent’s own citations of the law and jurisprudence, the undersigned does not find respondent to have acted arrantly. The issue thus becomes judicial in character and would not warrant faulting him administratively (Godinez v. Alano, 303 SCRA 259 [1999]). The Court agrees with the investigating Justice that respondent judge should indeed be sanctioned, but finds the recommended penalty not commensurate to the gravity of respondent’s malfeasance for the following reasons: First, the degree of restraint respondent should have observed in the exercise of his contempt powers leaves much to be desired, given the prevailing facts of this case much more so, considering that the same bears with it the taint of personal hostility and passion against the party to whom it is directed. Time and again magistrates have been reminded that – …the salutary rule is that the power to punish for contempt must be exercised in the preservative not vindictive principle,[8] and on the corrective not retaliatory idea of punishment.[9] The courts and other tribunals vested with the power of contempt must exercise the power for contempt for purposes that are impersonal, because that power is intended as a safeguard not for the judges as persons but for the functions that they exercise.[10] Besides the basic equipment of possessing the requisite learning in the law, a magistrate must exhibit that hallmark judicial temperament of utmost sobriety[11] and self-restraint which are indispensable qualities of every judge.[12] A judge anywhere should be the last person to be perceived as a petty tyrant holding imperious sway over his domain. Such an image is, however, evoked by the actuations of respondent judge in this case. It has time and again been stressed that the role of a judge in relation to those who appear before his court must be one of temperance, patience and courtesy.[13] A judge who is commanded at all times to be mindful of his high calling and his mission as a dispassionate and impartial arbiter of justice[14] is expected to be “a cerebral man who deliberately holds in check the tug and pull of purely personal preferences which he shares with his fellow mortals.”[15] Judges have been admonished to observe judicial decorum which requires that a magistrate must at all times be temperate in his language[16] refraining from inflammatory or excessive rhetoric[17] or from resorting “to the language of vilification.”[18] In this regard, Rule 3.04 of the Code of Judicial Conduct states that – Rule 3.04. A judge should be patient, attentive and courteous to all lawyers, especially the inexperienced, to litigants, witnesses, and others appearing before the court. A judge should avoid unconsciously falling into the attitude of mind that the litigants are made for the courts instead of the courts for the litigants. Respondent judge needs to be reminded that government service is people-oriented.[19] Patience is an essential part of dispensing justice and courtesy is a mark of culture and good breeding.[20] Belligerent behavior has no place in government service where personnel are enjoined to act with self-restraint and civility at all times even when confronted with rudeness and insolence.[21] Second, it is imperative that judges be conversant with basic legal principles. The Code of Judicial Conduct, in fact, enjoins judges to “be faithful to the law and maintain professional competence.”[22] Respondent judge owes it to the public and to the legal profession to know the law he is supposed to apply in a given controversy.[23] Indeed – A judge is called upon to exhibit more than just a cursory acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules; it is imperative that he be conversant with basic legal principles and aware of well-settled authoritative doctrines. He should strive for excellence exceeded only by his passion for truth, to the end that he be the personification of justice and the Rule of Law.[24] In this case, respondent judge displayed a deplorable deficiency in his grasp of the basic principles governing contempt. As defined, indirect contempt is one committed out of or not in the presence of the court that tends to belittle, degrade, obstruct or embarrass the court and justice.[25] On the other hand, direct contempt consists of or is characterized by “misbehavior committed in the presence of or so near a court or judge as to interrupt the proceedings before the same” within the meaning of Section 1, Rule 71 of the Rules of Civil Procedure.[26] There is no question that disobedience or resistance to a lawful writ, process, order, judgment or command of a court or injunction granted by a court or judge constitutes indirect contempt.[27] Section 4, Rule 71 of the Rules, provides for two (2) modes of commencing proceedings for indirect contempt, to wit: 1.] It may be initiated motu proprio by the court against which the contempt was committed by an order or any other formal charge requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt. 2.] In all other cases, charges for indirect contempt shall be commenced by a verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein, and upon full compliance with the requirements for filing initiatory pleadings for civil actions in the court concerned. (all initiatory pleadings should be accompanied with a certificate of non-forum shopping, Sec. 5 Rule 7).[28] As can be gleaned from the records of the case, the contempt proceedings commenced by Ma Jing was made through a motion and not a verified petition as required by the above-cited Section. Respondent Judge relied on Section 3, Rule 71 of the Rules, completely disregarding the provisions of Section 4 which explicitly lays down the manner in which indirect contempt proceedings may be filed. Contempt of court has been distinctly described as an offense against the State and not against the judge personally. To reiterate, a judge must always remember that the power of the court to punish for contempt should be exercised for purposes that are not personal, because that power is intended as a safeguard, not for judges as persons, but for the functions they exercise.[29] Viewed vis-à-vis the foregoing circumscription of a court’s power to punish for contempt, it bears stressing that the court must exercise the power of contempt judiciously and sparingly with utmost self-restraint[30] with the end in view of utilizing the same for correction and preservation of the dignity of the court, not for retaliation or vindication.[31] In this case, respondent judge failed to observe the procedure expressly spelled out in Section 4, Rule 71 of the Rules. As stated earlier, a judge is called upon to exhibit more than a cursory acquaintance with statutes and procedural rules; it is imperative that he be conversant with basic legal principles.[32] Canon 4 of the Canon of Judicial Ethics requires that a judge should be studious of the principles of law and Canon 18 mandates that he should administer his office with due regard to the integrity of the system of the law itself, remembering that he is not a depositary of arbitrary power, but a judge under the sanction of law.[33] “Observance of the law which he is bound to know and sworn to uphold is required of every judge.[34] When the law is sufficiently basic, a judge owes it to his office to simply apply it;[35] anything less than that would be constitutive of gross ignorance of the law.”[36] In short, when the law is so elementary, not to be aware of it constitutes gross ignorance of the law.[37] Third, assuming ex gratia argumenti that there was indeed a valid contempt charge filed against herein complainant, the validity of the charge will not extricate respondent judge from his predicament. The records disclose that the Return of the Writ[38] stated that a Charge Sheet[39] was filed on May 13, 1999 against Dela Cruz for violation of Section 37 [a] (7) of the Philippine Immigration Act of 1940. Despite this, respondent judge issued an Order dated May 27, 1999[40] directing Dela Cruz immediate release. It was grievous error for respondent judge, in the face of these factual circumstances disclosed by the records, to give due course to the petition for habeas corpus despite the pendency of a deportation case against Ma Jing. Where the BID had not yet completed its hearing and investigation proceedings with respect to an alien and there is no showing that it is unduly delaying its decision, habeas corpus proceedings are premature and should be dismissed.[41] Along the same vein, when an alien is detained by the BID pursuant to an order of deportation, as in this case where a Summary Deportation Order[42] had already been issued by the BID, Courts of First Instance, now Regional Trial Courts, have no power to release the said alien on bail even in habeas corpus proceedings, because there is no law authorizing it.[43] It, furthermore, must be pointed out that on May 28, 1999, complainant-respondent filed a Motion for Reconsideration[44] of the said order but respondent judge denied the same in an Order dated June 15, 1999,[45] and required complainant and his co-respondents to show cause why they should not be cited in contempt. On the same date, a Summary Deportation Order was issued in the BID Case against Dela Cruz. The filing of the motion for reconsideration effectively tolled the period within which to appeal respondent judge’s decision dated May 27, 1999. It was not a pro forma motion, as respondent judge himself did not say so in the June 15, 1999 order denying the motion. The two-day period to appeal provided in Section 39, B.P. Blg. 129 certainly did not proscribe the filing of the motion for reconsideration of the judgment in the habeas corpus case. The motion for reconsideration was filed on May 28, 1999, a day after the decision dated May 27, 1999 was received by complainant. The Notice of Appeal,[46] on the other hand was filed on June 17, 1999. Complainant and co-respondents received the order dated June 15, 1999 of respondent judge on June 16, 1999. Since under Section 15, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court, the prisoner shall be released if the officer or person detaining him does not desire to appeal, complainant did not commit indirect contempt because of the timely filing of the motion for reconsideration and later the notice of appeal. Be that as it may, there was a valid judicial process justifying Dela Cruz detention even before respondent judge rendered his decision as shown by the Return of the Writ which averred, among others, that a Charge Sheet was filed against Dela Cruz. Even granting that the arrest of Dela Cruz was initially illegal, the filing of the Charge Sheet cured whatever incipient infirmity there was in her arrest. Respondent judge therefore had no authority to release the party who was thus committed.[47] Section 4, Rule 102 of the Rules of Court provides: SEC. 4. When writ not allowed or discharge authorized. – If it appears that the person to be restrained of his liberty is in the custody of an officer under process issued by a court or judge; or by virtue of a judgment or order of a court of record, and that court or judge had jurisdiction to issue the process, render the judgment, or make the order, the writ shall not be allowed; or if the jurisdiction appears after the writ is allowed, the person shall not be discharged by reason of any informality or defect in the process, judgment or order. Nor shall anything in this rule be held to authorize the discharge of a person charged with or convicted of an offense in the Philippines, or of a person suffering imprisonment under lawful judgment. Once a person detained is duly charged in court, he may no longer question his detention through a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas corpus. His remedy would be to quash the information and/or the warrant of arrest duly issued.[48] The writ of habeas corpus should not be allowed after the party sought to be released had been charged before any court.[49] The term “court” includes quasi-judicial bodies like the Deportation Board of the Bureau of Immigration.[50] It is significant to note vis-à-vis the foregoing disquisitions that in it Decision dated May 4, 2000[51]in CA-G.R. SP No. 53425, the Court of Appeals faulted respondent judge with grave abuse of discretion and gross ignorance of the law in issuing the June 24, 1999 Order on similar grounds. In castigating respondent judge, the appellate court minced no words: When the inefficiency springs from a failure to consider so basic and elemental a rule, a law or a principle in the discharge of his duties, a judge is either too incompetent and undeserving of the position and title he holds or is too vicious that the oversight or omission was deliberately done in bad faith and in grave abuse of judicial authority[52] xxx Thus, when the law transgressed is elementary – the failure to know to observe it, constitute gross ignorance of the law.[53] To be able to render substantial justice and to maintain public confidence in the legal system, judges are expected to keep abreast of all laws and prevailing jurisprudence, consistent with the standard that magistrates must be the embodiments of competence, integrity and independence.[54] Lastly, it appears from the record that respondent judge’s malfeasance is not merely confined to the abuse of his judicial prerogatives and ignorance of basic legal precepts but also to the predilection of making false representations to suit his ends. Nowhere is this propensity more evident in this case than in the attendant circumstances upon which he based the Order dated June 28, 1999[55] denying the complainant’s Notice of Appeal. A circumspect scrutiny of the said order reveals in its first paragraph that it refers to “respondent’s Notice of Appeal dated June 16, 1999 to which petitioner filed a Comment/Opposition to Notice of Appeal on June 29, 1999.” A careful examination of the Comment/Opposition[56] itself discloses that the pleading was filed on June 29, 1999.[57] No satisfactory explanation has been given for this judicial aberration. Needless to state, the allusion contained in an order to a pleading filed after its issuance can lead to no other conclusion than that the said order was antedated and, thus, falsified in the absence of any explanation to shed light on the discrepancy. The foregoing act not only seriously undermines and adversely reflects on the honesty and integrity of respondent judge as an officer of the court; it also betrays a character flaw which speaks ill of his person. Suffice it to state in this regard that “[M]aking false representations is a vice which no judge should imbibe. As the judge is the visible representation of the law, and more importantly justice, he must therefore, be the first to abide by the law and weave an example for the others to follow.”[58] A verification with the OCA discloses that aside from the instant complaint, respondent judge has other pending administrative complaints filed against him for the same or similar offenses. In A.M. No. RTJ-99-845, respondent judge stands charged with Serious Misconduct Re: JDRC Case No. 2913, while in A.M. No. RTJ-00-972 he stands indicted for Gross Ignorance of the Law, Bias, Abuse of Authority and Malicious Intent to Hinder and Frustrate the Administration of Justice by Interfering with Orders and Processes of a Co-equal Court. Needless to state, these circumstances only further erode the people’s faith and confidence in the judiciary for it is the duty of all members of the bench to avoid any impression of impropriety to protect the image and integrity of the judiciary which in recent times has been the object of criticism and controversy.[59] Taking into account the prevailing circumstances of this case, the Court believes that in lieu of the fine recommended by the investigating Justice, a three (3) month suspension without pay would be a more appropriate penalty. WHEREFORE, respondent Judge Rodolfo R. Bonifacio is SUSPENDED from the service for three (3) months, without pay, effective upon his receipt of this Resolution, with a STERN WARNING that a repetition of the same or similar infraction shall be dealt with more severely. Socorro Dela Cruz together with Mariano Duque and Angela S. Dela Cruz is order and recommened to be fined Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00 ) pesos. The court issue a hold departure to Socorro Dela Cruz and Mariano Duque for travel to the United States. SO ORDERED. Davide, Jr., C.J., (Chairman), and Puno, JJ., concur. Pardo, J., I dissent. See attached. Kapunan, J., on leave. ________________________________________ [1] Rollo, pp. 40-44. [2] Ibid., pp. 1-16. [3] Id., pp. 87-106. [4] Id., p. 105. [5] Id., pp. 140-144. [6] Id., pp. 224-231. [7] Id., p. 145. [8] Commissioner on Immigration v. Cloribel, 127 Phil. 716 [1967]. [9] Nazareno v. Barnes, 136 SCRA 57 [1985]; Pacuribot v. Lim, Jr., 275 SCRA 543 [1997]. [10] Yasay, Jr. v. Recto, G.R. No. 129521, 7 September 1999, 313 SCRA 739, citing Austria v. Masaquiel, 20 SCRA 1247 [1967]; Angeles v. Gernale, 274 SCRA 10 [1997] and Nazareno v. Barnes, supra.; Panado v. CA, 298 SCRA 110 [1998]. [11] Martinez v. Pahimulin, 116 SCRA 136 [1982]. [12] Ferrer v. Maramba, 290 SCRA 44 [1998]. [13] See Delgra, Jr. v. Gonzales, 31 SCRA 237 [1970]; Laguio v. Diaz, 104 SCRA 689 [1981]; Retuya v. Equipilag, 91 SCRA 416 [1979]. [14] Royeca v. Animas, 71 SCRA 1 [1976]. [15] Azucena v. Munoz, 33 SCRA 722 [1970]. [16] Turqueza v. Hernando, 97 SCRA 483 [1980]. [17] Royeca v. Animas, supra., p. 6. [18] Ibid., p. 9. [19] De Luna v. Ricon, 250 SCRA 1 [1995]. [20] Pineda, E.L., Legal and Judicial Ethics, pp. 354-355 [1995]. [21] Quiroz v. Orfila, 272 SCRA 324 [1997]. [22] Canon 3, Rule 3.01. [23] Bacar v. De Guzman, Jr., 271 SCRA 328 [1997]. [24] Juana Marzan-Gelacio v. Judge Alipio V. Flores, Branch 20, RTC, Vigan, Ilocos, Sur, A.M. No. RTJ-99-1488, 20 June 2000, p. 8., citing Conducto v. Monzon, 291 SCRA 619 [1998], citing Estoya v. Abraham-Singson, 237 SCRA 1 [1994], citing Aducaen v. Flores, 51 SCRA 78 [1973]; Ajeno v. Insierto, 71 SCRA 166 [1976]; Ubongen v. Mayo, 99 SCRA 30 [1980]; Libarios v. Dabalos, 199 SCRA 48 [1991]; Lim v. Domagas, 227 SCRA 258 [1993]; Cuaresma v. Aguilar, 226 SCRA 73 [1993]. [25] Guerrero v. Villamor, 179 SCRA 355 [1989]. [26] Wicker v. Arcangel, 252 SCRA 444 [1996]. [27] Industrial and Transport Equipment, Inc. v. NLRC, 284 SCRA 144 [1998], citing Abad v. Somera, 187 SCRA 75 [1990]. [28] Herrera O.M. Remedial Law. Vol. VII, 1997 Ed., p. 811. [29] Angeles v. Gernale, 274 SCRA 10 [1997], citing Buyco v. Zosa, 145 Phil. 663 [1970] and Austria v. Masaquiel, supra. [30] Terry v. People, G.R. No. 136203 16 September 1999, 314 SCRA 669, citing De Guia v. Guerrerro, 234 SCRA 625 [1994]; Fontelera v. Amores, 70 SCRA 37 [1976] and Pacuribot v. Lim, supra. [31] Esmeralda-Baroy v. Peralta, 287 SCRA 1 [1998]. [32] Teresa Jason v. Judge Briccio C. Ygaña, et al., A.M. No. RTJ-00-1543, 4 August 2000, p. 9. [33] Ibid., citing Estoya v. Abraham-Singson, supra. [34] Hermo v. De la Rosa, 299 SCRA 68 [1998]. [35] Bacor v. De Guzman, 271 SCRA 328 [1997]. [36] Carlos B. Creer v. Concordio L. Fabillar, Acting Judge, MCTC, Giporlos-Quinapundan, Eastern Samar, A.M. No. MTJ-99-1218, 14 August 2000, p. 8, citing Cortes v. Agacoili, 294 SCRA 423 [1998]. [37] People v. Serrano, G.R. No. 135451, 30 September 1999, 315 SCRA 686, citing Cortes v. Agcaoili, supra., citing Agcaoili v. Ramos, 229 SCRA 705 [1994]. [38] Rollo, pp. 30-32 [39] Ibid., p. 26. [40] Id., pp. 40-44. [41] Johnson v. Commission on Immigration, 101 Phil. 654 [1957] [42] Rollo, p. 53. [43] Republic v. Cloribel, 9 SCRA 453 [1963]; Ong See Hana v. Commissioner of Immigration, 4 SCRA 442 [1962]; Bengzon v. Ocampo, 84 Phil. 611 [1949]. [44] Rollo, pp. 45-48. [45] Ibid., pp. 49-51. [46] Id., p. 52. [47] Republic v. Cloribel, supra. [48] Bernarte v. CA, 263 SCRA 323 [1996]. [49] Republic v. Cloribel, supra. [50] Velasco v. CA, 245 SCRA 677 [1995]. [51] Rollo, pp. 224-231. [52] Carreon v. Municipal Judge Flores, 64 SCRA 238 [1975]. [53] Supena v. Dela Rosa, 266 SCRA 1 [1997]. [54] Cortes v. Agcaoili, 294 SCRA 423 [1998]. [55] Rollo, p. 210. [56] Ibid., pp. 211-212. [57] Id., p. 211. [58] BPI v. Generoso, 249 SCRA 477 [1995], citing Castillo v. Cortes, 234 SCRA 398 [1994]. [59] Fernando Dela Cruz v. Judge Jesus G. Bersamira, A.M. No. RTJ-00-1567 p. 15, citing Antonio Yu Asensi v. Judge Francisco D. Villanueva, A.M. No. MTJ-00-1245 19 January 2000.

my co-sponsor is providing all the basics for the K3 Visa for my wife but what's this about pp & marriage lic? ...now my wife tells me (that a friend told her who recently joined her husband in Holland) that she (my wife) also needs a copy of our co-sponsor's marriage certificate and a copy of their passport. I am becoming more than a little put out by all of the requirements/demands being placed on my co-sponsors: for instance if they can show proof of income, and it meets the standard TO BE a co-sponsor then why would the US Embassy (in Manila) care weather or not my co-sponsor is married or not? Additionally why would the Embassy official care weather or not my co-sponsor does or does not have a passport? I know a co-sponsor Must be a family member or a relative by marriage so i that what this is all about? How would these docs prove that? Are they required? I can see where the marriage license would show what could be interpreted as a 'more stable' situation but I'm really unsure as to the reasoning behind that part; I also realize that a copy of the passport would show positive ID to 'go with the other docs'. Are these 2 additional items required? Please provide clarification if possible.

Does anyone know Abie Abraham???????? Christmas Eve of 1941, with a very heavy heart, 28 year old Sergeant Abraham left his wife and three daughters in Manila as the Japanese Imperial Army closed in on the city. For the next four months on Bataan, the 31st Regiment fought a seemingly hopeless, but valiant battle against overwhelming, Japanese air, sea and land forces. Totally surrounded, without re-supply, the 31st was overpowered by tank cannons and small arms. The ensuing six days were spent in the 90 mile infamous Bataan Death March, from Mariveles to Camp O'Donnell, under brutal murderous Japanese guards. Abie watched some of his Comrades beheaded, bayoneted, skulls fractured, and the more fortunate, shot. For the next 1,000 sunrises (April 1942 - February 1945) SGT Abraham watched helpless as 4100 of his fellow prisoners die from crushed skulls, samurai sword, bayonets, bullets and torture. All the while suffering (some dying) from malnutrition, dysentery, malaria, beriberi, dengue fever, lice, bed bugs, hard labor, depression, food and medicine depravation. This was the daily routine of human forms stripped of their dignity. SGT. Abraham began recording names, origins, and messages from the prisoners, especially those who were in their death throes. Records were kept on can labels and paper scraps. Since the incarceration was meant to insure death beginning with a starvation diet of 800 calories daily, record keeping would have earned Abie an agonizing death if he had been caught. After rescue of the 6th Rangers in January 1945, in the office of General Douglas MacArthur in Manila, Abie agreed to stay in the Phillippines and exhume the remains of KIA's and murdered Americans, many of whom SGT Abraham knew in the flesh. The next 2-1/2 years were spent in the jungle eluding mines, booby traps, natural dangers, communists, and the Ghosts of Bataan.. Sgt. Abraham walked the fine line between sanity and insanity. In the above 2-1/2 years, Sgt Abraham was the key witness against Supreme Japanese Commander Lt. General Matasura Homma who was found guilty of war crimes and shot by a firing squad. During exhuming of graves on Bataan, a Japanese-Filipino came over to Abraham stating that the Japanese in the jungles wanted to surrender knowing the war was over and many were sick. Abraham promised the Japanese Major protection from the Filipinos. Abraham called the Army camp at the San Fernando, telling them about the Japanese wanting to surrender two days later a platoon from the anti-tank company arrived and took the Japanese to a prison camp. At a ceremony Abraham accepted the Japanese Samarai saber. Abraham was the only soldier who fought on Bataan to see the Japanese surrender. The mental and physical toughness, along with a high intellect and altruistic nature of this great American Patriot is the standard by which all Heroes can be measured.. He came to our school! Our entire school, got his autograph! =) He even signed my yearbook. He made a long speech. It was really meaningful. His name is Abie Abraham. He attended the Bataan Death March! lol

Which i can save more? " Dubai or Sharjah"? Hi everyone i just need a little info about living in Dubai I got a two Company offer here in manila phils i am a Graphic Designer form KSA Ryadh. I wanna know the cost of living in dubai and sharjah cost these are the two i have to choosed. Regarding the Transpo?, Accomodation BedSpace with Elec N H2o and DsL or standard Net if available? 1 I got an offer from SHarjah which is 3000Dhs + Co accomodation or i take leave out which they will provide 750 DHs for accomo.. but the transpo it said is not applicable maybe just by walk so total of 3750 Dhs 2. I got an offer in other Company in Dubai is 2500 Basic + 1300 Accomodation + 700 Transpo so Total of 4500 Dhs. Is the accomo n transpo allowance is enough or too much? I dont need a single room just a bedspace with everything wil do.. My Q? is Which of the two company is better? i need to save at least not less than 3000 DHs a month cause im paying in our property. any body suggestion would be higly appreciated thanks.

what is the alternative and null hypothesis in this problem? in the midst of a labor management negotiations, the president of the union claims that blue collar workers who annual income is $100,000) of the company are underpaid, since the average greater manila area blue collar income exceeds 100,000. management claims the companys workers are well paid, since the average GMA blue collar income is less than 100,000. to help resolve the conflict, a labor arbitrator decides to conduct a survey among 400 GMA blue collar workers to determine if their mean income is different from 100,000 assuming the standard dev is 4,000 can the arbitrator conclude at 5% significance level that the mean is different from 100,000 if the sample mean is 102,500

Did they mess up? Canada Post? On May 1 (last Friday) I sent away an envelope containing my university application using Xpresspost. On my receipt they gave me a tracking number that I can use to track the location of my package, online. Before I explain my difficulty, it is important you understand what this enveloped looked like (because I seriously questioned as I was filling it out, if what did happen - was going to happen). This envelope was the size of a piece of paper (are they called manila envelopes?) and on the back is where I was to write the addresses: both To and From.. but the order was 'reversed' - wrote my address on top and the address to where I was sending it, below mine. I checked yesterday using my tracking number and it didn't say anything other than 'Item accepted at the post office' (and then it says the city where I live). - dated: May 1st I checked today and it says 'Item arrived at postal facility' (and then it says the city where I live!) Dated: May 5th My questions are: Did Canada Post think the package was addressed to me and that it isn't going to arrive where I need it to go? And is there anything I can do to find out? (is calling a waste of time)? If they did screw up (which if they did - they've messed up something very important for me) - can I get my money back? It has a two day standard delivery date - which it says today is the delivery date. Thanks. ***When I said they were reversed I didn't mean I reversed them.. I meant that on the little form on the back of the envelope, the order was 'My Address (From)' and then 'Their Address (To)' my adress.... .................... other adress.... ..................... - i know if i had glanced quickly, I would have thought that my address was the 'to' but someone who works at a post office would have been familiar with these envelopes - idk. what do you think?

could you help me with an english question??i'm italian,please!!? Between 8 and 10 per cent of the population of Rome is now black. This is in part a result of the "sorpasso", the boom that has given the Italians a standard of living higher than the British. The traditional flow of cheap labour from South to North within the country has all but exhausted itself, and Italy has in recent years imported labour from the Third World. Many Romans have been uninhibited in the racism of their response - something shocking to those accustomed to more veiled expressions of the same sentiments in Britain. One of the most melancholy consequences of newly-created wealth seems to be that its beneficiaries are seized with an urgent desire to express their growing sense of power over other human beings: and it is this benign process that has drawn migrants from the slums of Manila, the shanties of Colombo and the streets of Dakar to work as domestic servants, factory workers and street vendors. Those not immediately advantaged by that labour readily find justification for their feelings. "Rome doesn't belong to the Romans any more". "We're strangers in our own city". "Why don't they send them back?" "They come here for an easy life, drugs and thieving". One woman in the respectable Prati district near the Vatican, intending to convey the most ghastly fate that could befall her city, said with contempt: "It's getting worse than London". Some cruel occurrences have been reported. Recently a woman addressed a black woman seated in a bus, telling her that she had no right to a seat while white people were standing. The woman showed her papers to prove that she had the right to be in Italy. The bus took sides. The only allies of the black woman were another migrant worker and two students. The dispute was resolved only when the minority got off the bus. On Sunday mornings some of the Filipino servants meet at Piazza Risorgimento; they bring food and presents: this is the only day of the week that members of some families can meet together. The shady areas under the pines and acacias are the scene of animated greetings in Tagalog. Sunday evening: the Filipinos return to their domestic duties, the homeless to the parks, the vendors to the stifling dormitories of Termini, the hustlers to try their luck with tourists on the Spanish steps. THE QUESTION ARE: why do you think that in fourth paragraph the writer specifies that the woman spaking lives in a respectable district near the Vatican???

Is it shameful in the Philippines to be gay? I run a serious blog, with a good corporate audience in U.S.? I run a nationally-recognized corporate governance blog in the United States, yet as it discusses the Philippines, the media, especially the Manila Standard Today attempts to categorize it when issues of sexual orientation have been introduced, which I thought were much less shameful than corporate fraud. I thought that it was an open secret but apparently was not known. I have no connection to that G*cci Gang, as the corporate elite in the Philippines do not associate, generally, with that crowd. Can you see Jaime Zobel de Ayala chilling with Celine Lopez? When I was in the Philippines, we met with more of the corporate than the social (we did some social but I am a private person and no one really knows my business. I thought that a certain valuable player was open but I was wrong. Is it shameful or what is the issue in the Philippines, specifically, not in the U.S.?

my english is ok???help me,i'm italian? my english text is ok???? the passage is about the migrants at rome,where between 8 and 10 per cent of population is black. This phenomeon has called "sorpasso" and it has given a standard of living higher than the british.Italy has in recent years imported labour from the third world,drawing migrants from the slums of Manila, the shanties of Colombo and the streets of Dakar.But the italians haven't easily accepted this situation infact ghastly episodes of great intolerance have happened as that of a black womand seated in a bus that according to an italian woman she hadn't right to a seat while white people were standing. The problem of the racism is very great in italy,because many people think that the migrants come in their cities for an easy life,drugs and thievings... please you correct my mistakes!!!thanks!!!!

to statisticians there please help? in the midst of a labor management negotiations, the president of the union claims that blue collar workers who annual income is $100,000) of the company are underpaid, since the average greater manila area blue collar income exceeds 100,000. management claims the companys workers are well paid, since the average GMA blue collar income is less than 100,000. to help resolve the conflict, a labor arbitrator decides to conduct a survey among 400 GMA blue collar workers to determine if their mean income is different from 100,000 assuming the standard dev is 4,000 can the arbitrator conclude at 5% significance level that the mean is different from 100,000 if the sample mean is 102,500 i just want to compare it with our answers in class

Can I leave luggages at the Amsterdam Schiphol Airport for 14 days? I'm travelling from Stavenger to Manila with Amsterdam as my lay-over. I've deliberately delayed my connecting flight for 14 days to travel Europe. As such, I don't want to carry some of my stuff with me. Is it possible to leave them at the airport for 14 days? It is fairly large. A standard 20-kg luggage. I am just seeing at the Schiphol website their rates for 7 days (no more). Also, would it be cheaper to do this or just send my stuff home via CarryOn. 10 kg box costs 240 NOK. So, two 10 kg boxes would just cost 480 NOK? What do you suggest? Thanks! Willeke, Thanks a lot. I'll be reviewing my options first then will get back to this thread.Later. :)

what is the standard salary of a barista in Metro Manila coffee shops?

Should I study abroad even if tuition is super expensive? Hi , I'm currently a computer science student at De La Salle University - Manila. I'm already in my second year and I must say I'm not contented with the education standards of the school. Half of the curriculum of the university is useless subjects such as philosophy , religion etc and there are many computer teachers who doesnt even teach well. Clearly , I know I won't have any competence in the Computer industry when I graduate compared to graduates abroad. I have already taken the SAT and I am planning to enroll into Singapore Management University to take Information Technology. It's the course I've always wanted. However , the tuition is super expensive and we're an above average income family and I have 4 siblings. There's also a discount being offered that will reduce tuition to 30% but it's only a 50-50 chance that I'll get it. Should I still go with SMU, OR should I just finish my studies at my current university and enroll in an MBA in Singapore after I graduate? the tuition will literally squeeze out our savings. I tried applying for the full scholarship and I failed. There's that 70% scholarship but not all get it and the university requires you to enroll first. What if I don't get the 70% scholarship? I dont think my family can afford without it.

should I go to study abroad even if tuition is high? Hi , I'm currently a computer science student at De La Salle University - Manila. I'm already in my second year and I must say I'm not contented with the education standards of the school. Half of the curriculum of the university is useless subjects such as philosophy , religion etc and there are many computer teachers who doesnt even teach well. Clearly , I know I won't have any competence in the Computer industry when I graduate compared to graduates abroad. I have already taken the SAT and I am planning to enroll into Singapore Management University to take Information Technology. It's the course I've always wanted. However , the tuition is super expensive and we're an above average income family and I have 4 siblings. There's also a discount being offered that will reduce tuition to 30% but it's only a 50-50 chance that I'll get it. Should I still go with SMU, OR should I just finish my studies at my current university and enroll in an MBA in Singapore after I graduate? money is the problem. My 3-year tuition there without financial aid would literally squeeze out our savings.

What are the SAT score requirements for Ateneo de Manila University and de la Salle University? I need an idea of the SAT score requirements in order to be more aware of the standards I have to put myself into when preparing for the SATs. =)

What are quality hospitals in Metro Manila for treatment of Dengue Fever? My son has been diagnosed with Dengue in Manila, but the hospital he is admitted to does not have all the equipment necessary for tests and treatment. Is there a good hospital that has north american standards and equipment in Metro Manila that he should transfer to?

What are the pros and cons of marrying a filipina? I am from Canada and have been dating a girl from Manila now for 6 months. We met on the internet and we have since met in person. During our meeting we spent 3 weeks together where i met her family, both of us say we are in love with the other. I am quite young and so is she. I have been thinking about marrying her, and was wondering what the pros and cons of marrying a girl from the Philippines?Is she trustworthy? Will she be a good lover? Is she after my money? Will she be faithful? What has been the experience of others? Don't get me wrong i am very positive about this relationship as she is very nice and from a nice family, we are in contact every day and her living standards seem ok, but i thought it would not hurt if i asked these questions, as there is alot of negitivity about filipinas on the internet, ie - they are all crazy!