How contempt proceedings commenced | Contempt (RULE 71) | SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

Below is a comprehensive discussion on how contempt proceedings are commenced under Rule 71 of the Philippine Rules of Court, with focus on both direct and indirect contempt. This write-up is organized for clarity and depth, based on the current rules and jurisprudence.

I. OVERVIEW OF CONTEMPT UNDER RULE 71

Contempt of court is defined broadly as disobedience or resistance to a court’s lawful order, or conduct tending to belittle, degrade, obstruct, or embarrass the administration of justice. Rule 71 of the Rules of Court governs contempt proceedings in the Philippines and classifies contempt into two general categories:

  1. Direct Contempt (Sec. 1, Rule 71)
  2. Indirect (Constructive) Contempt (Sec. 3, Rule 71)

The manner by which proceedings for each type of contempt are commenced differs because direct contempt is dealt with summarily, while indirect contempt involves formal processes akin to a separate action.

II. DIRECT CONTEMPT

A. Nature and Definition

  • Direct contempt involves contumacious acts committed in the presence of or so near a court or judge while in session as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings.
  • Examples under Section 1 of Rule 71 include:
    1. Misbehavior in the presence of or so near the court as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings.
    2. Disrespect toward the court.
    3. Offensive conduct toward others in the court’s presence.
    4. Refusal to be sworn as a witness or to answer as a witness.

B. How Commenced

  • Direct contempt does not require a separate written charge or petition.
  • Because the offending behavior occurs in the immediate view and presence of the court, the judge may act summarily.
    • “Summarily” means the judge may proceed instantly, without the usual procedural formalities of notice and hearing, to punish the person for direct contempt.

C. Summary Nature of Proceedings

  • Immediately upon the commission of the contumacious act, the court may:
    1. Cite the offender in contempt.
    2. Impose the appropriate penalty (fine or imprisonment).
    3. Require the offender to stay in custody until the penalty is satisfied, if imprisonment is imposed or if a fine is unpaid (subject to limitations set by law).

D. Remedies of a Person Adjudged in Direct Contempt

  • The person adjudged in direct contempt may move for reconsideration of the contempt order within the same proceeding.
  • Alternatively, the person may elevate the matter via certiorari or other appropriate remedy to a higher court, under the conditions prescribed in the Rules. However, the judgment remains immediately executory and is not automatically stayed by an appeal or certiorari unless a higher court issues an order to that effect.

III. INDIRECT (CONSTRUCTIVE) CONTEMPT

A. Nature and Definition

  • Indirect contempt refers to acts that are not committed in the immediate view and presence of the court but which tend to degrade the administration of justice, cause disrespect of the court’s authority, or defy its lawful orders.
  • Common examples under Section 3 of Rule 71:
    1. Misbehavior of an officer of the court in the performance of official duties.
    2. Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful writ, judgment, or process.
    3. Improper conduct tending to impede or degrade the administration of justice.
    4. Assuming to act as an attorney or officer of the court without authority.
    5. Failure to obey a subpoena duly served.
    6. Rescuing a person or property in the custody of an officer.

B. How Commenced

Indirect contempt proceedings cannot be taken up summarily. They typically require the following formal steps:

  1. Initiation by a Charge in Writing or a Verified Petition

    • The contempt charge is often commenced via a verified petition (or “charge in writing”), filed either by:
      • The offended party (e.g., a litigant whose rights were infringed by the alleged contumacious act); or
      • The court motu proprio (the court itself may initiate proceedings if it becomes aware of acts constituting indirect contempt).
    • This written charge must clearly specify the acts or omissions constituting indirect contempt, conforming to the requirements for a complaint in a civil action (e.g., containing the ultimate facts, relief sought, and verification).

  2. Docketing and Summons

    • Once the verified petition or charge is filed, it is docketed as a special civil action for contempt (if initiated by a party).
    • The clerk of court issues summons or orders for the respondent to appear and file an answer (or comment) to the charges within a prescribed period.

  3. Filing of Answer

    • The respondent is required to answer under oath within the time set by the court (usually governed by rules akin to ordinary civil actions).
    • The respondent’s answer should specifically address the allegations in the charge.

  4. Hearing

    • After the issues are joined, the court conducts a hearing.
    • Both parties are given the chance to present evidence, witnesses, and arguments.
    • This hearing ensures that the constitutional rights to due process are observed, distinguishing indirect contempt from the summary nature of direct contempt.

  5. Judgment

    • After trial, the court issues a decision stating whether the respondent is guilty of contempt and what penalty (fine, imprisonment, or other remedial measures) shall be imposed.

C. Distinct Procedural Points

  • Because indirect contempt proceedings are in the nature of a special civil action, the Rules of Court provisions on ordinary civil actions also apply insofar as they are not inconsistent with Rule 71.
  • A copy of the charge, together with an order requiring the respondent to show cause why he/she should not be punished for contempt, must be served as in regular civil actions.
  • The respondent has full due process rights—notice, opportunity to be heard, and the right to counsel.

D. Remedies of a Person Adjudged in Indirect Contempt

  • The respondent found guilty of indirect contempt may seek:
    1. Motion for Reconsideration within the same court that issued the contempt order.
    2. Appeal or certiorari to a higher court if the penalty includes imprisonment or if there are substantial issues of jurisdiction, grave abuse of discretion, or errors of law.
  • Unlike direct contempt orders, judgments in indirect contempt proceedings are not necessarily immediately executory; the finality or stay depends on whether a higher court issues a restraining order or if an appeal is perfected.

IV. SPECIAL NOTES ON COMMENCEMENT OF CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS

  1. Direct Contempt

    • Commences instantly and summarily upon commission of the offensive act.
    • No petition, written complaint, or further notice is required, but minimal due process in the form of a summary hearing or immediate explanation can be allowed at the judge’s discretion.

  2. Indirect Contempt

    • Commences via a written charge or verified petition, typically entitled “Petition for Contempt” or “Charge in Contempt,” filed in the proper court.
    • Respondent must be accorded notice, an opportunity to answer, and a hearing.

  3. Who May Initiate

    • Motu Proprio: The court itself may initiate indirect contempt if it has personal knowledge or is apprised of facts that may constitute indirect contempt.
    • Interested Party: Any party in a case who suffers from or is offended by the alleged contumacious acts may file a verified petition in the same court where the main action is pending or was decided (unless provided otherwise by law).

  4. Effect on Principal Action

    • Contempt proceedings, although related to a main case, are treated as separate or ancillary in character. The principal action typically continues unaffected unless the contumacious act impacts the progress of the main suit.

V. PRACTICAL POINTS AND JURISPRUDENTIAL GUIDELINES

  • Courts are encouraged to exercise the power to punish for contempt judiciously and sparingly. The power must be exercised only to uphold the court’s authority and the orderly administration of justice.
  • The distinction between direct and indirect contempt hinges on whether the act is committed in the immediate presence and view of the court. When in doubt, courts often require a formal charge to ensure due process.
  • Penalties for contempt (both direct and indirect) vary. The Rules of Court and related statutes set limits on fines and periods of imprisonment depending on the class of court (e.g., MTC or RTC) and the circumstances of the offense.
  • Indirect contempt, being more akin to an independent action, follows standard rules: the allegations must be specific, the petition verified, and service of summons and notice of hearing must be properly effected.

VI. SUMMARY

  • Direct contempt arises from misbehavior in or near the court’s presence. Proceedings commence and conclude summarily, upon the discretion of the judge, without the necessity of a written charge.
  • Indirect contempt arises from acts not done in the immediate presence of the court but which obstruct the administration of justice or undermine its authority. Proceedings must be formally initiated by a verified petition or written charge, with notice and hearing as in a special civil action.

Understanding these initiation procedures is essential for both practitioners and litigants. Timely recognition of whether the act constitutes direct or indirect contempt ensures the correct procedural steps are taken—either immediate summary action for direct contempt or the filing of a verified petition for indirect contempt.

Disclaimer: This discussion is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. For specific cases or particular questions, it is advisable to consult directly with a qualified Philippine attorney or seek official legal counsel.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login