Scribd
Upload
69 views1 page

Cawaling Vs

Marc Douglas Cagas sent a letter to the Court Administrator referring to a recent Supreme Court decision against him. In the letter, Cagas expressed that the decision was deceitful and could poison law students' minds, and he requested the Administrator show DVDs about the "truth" to the Justices. The COMELEC issued a resolution directing Cagas to explain why he should not be held in contempt. Cagas claimed the letter was a personal communication not intended as disrespect. However, the Supreme Court held Cagas could not claim privacy of communication after admitting in the letter he requested the Administrator show the DVDs to the Justices so they could know the "truth." The Court said any messages to Justices regarding

Uploaded by

Michael Renz Palabay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
69 views1 page

Cawaling Vs

Marc Douglas Cagas sent a letter to the Court Administrator referring to a recent Supreme Court decision against him. In the letter, Cagas expressed that the decision was deceitful and could poison law students' minds, and he requested the Administrator show DVDs about the "truth" to the Justices. The COMELEC issued a resolution directing Cagas to explain why he should not be held in contempt. Cagas claimed the letter was a personal communication not intended as disrespect. However, the Supreme Court held Cagas could not claim privacy of communication after admitting in the letter he requested the Administrator show the DVDs to the Justices so they could know the "truth." The Court said any messages to Justices regarding

Uploaded by

Michael Renz Palabay
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 1

CASE DIGEST: MARC DOUGLAS IV C. CAGAS, Petitioner, v.

COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, ATTY. SIXTO BRILLANTES, JR., AND THE PROVINCIAL
ELECTION OFFICER OF DAVAO DEL SUR, REPRESENTED BY ATTY. MA. FEBES BARLAAN,
Respondents. (G.R. No. 209185; February 25, 2014).

FACTS: The COMELEC issued a Resolution directing petitioner Marc Douglas to explain why he should not be cited
in contempt of court for the letter he sent to court administrator Jose Midas Marquez. The letter referred to reads:

Atty. Jose Midas Marquez


SC Building, P. Faura St., Manila

Kamusta ka Pards, the recent SC decision in Cagas vs COMELEC did not surprise me. What struck me
was the level of deceitfulness of whoever wrote the decision. It can poison the minds of law students.

Pare may padala ako na dvds parang awa mo na sa taga Davao del Surat sa sambayanan, ipapanood
mo please sa mga A. Justices para malaman nila ang totoo.

God never sleeps.

God rewards the faithful.

Salamat Pards.

(signed)
Marc Cagas

Cagas, stating that the letter was a personal communication to his friend was not intended to be an official
communication to Atty. Marquez, explained that he did not mean nor intend the letter to be an affront or a sign of
disrespect to the Honorable Court. Far from being that, the letter, in its entirety, actually shows Cagas' belief in the
fairness of the court and its members. Cagas may have expressed himself poorly, but in the second paragraph of the
letter, he communicates his continuing faith in the Courts capacity to act on the truth, hence his request for Atty.
Marquez to show the DVDs to the justices para malaman nila ang totoo.

ISSUE: May Cagas be held guilty of indirect contempt?

HELD: Cagas cannot raise the defense of privacy of communication, especially after his admission that he requested
Court Administrator Marquez to show the DVDs to the members of this Court. Cagas had to admit this since in his
letter to Court Administrator Marquez he actually asked the latter thus: x x x ipapanood mo please sa mga A. Justices
para malaman nila ang totoo. In any event, messages addressed to the members of the Court, regardless of media or
even of intermediary, in connection with the performance of their judicial functions become part of the judicial record
and are a matter of concern for the entire Court.
https://www.projectjurisprudence.com/2017/06/cagas-v-comelec-gr-no-209185-
february.html?fbclid=IwAR2pnpj27oiytj3dGCR3xpW6nWBHcVyqOuU47VxKw210mXEbFjeQefuW2S4

You might also like