In Re Laureta, 148 SCRA 382

FACTS: Eva Maravilla-Ilustre wrote a letter to the Justices of the First Division of the Supreme Court
alleging that the dismissal of her case via a minute resolution was promulgated unjustly and in violation
of the legal and judicial ethics. In her letter, she threatened that she will hold a press conference
regarding the issue and requested that the judges disclose the extent of their paricipation in the
promulgation of the minute resolution. She also claims that Justice Yap of the first division was
previously the law partner of Atty. Ordonez, then counsel of the other party, and now the Solicitor
General.

 The Supreme Court, acting on the letter of Ilustre, explained that when the resolution was
issued, Justice Abad was the presiding justice and Justice Yap had no knowledge of the fact that
Atty. Ordonez was the counsel for the opponent and that Justice Yap later on inhibited himself
from the case.
 Atty. Wenceslao Laureta, counsel of Ilustre, allegedly circulated these complaints to the press. In
particular, the headline in the Daily Express read “ Ordonez, 8 Justices Face Graft Charges”
making it appear that the Justices were charged with Graft and Corruption.

HELD: Judicial Independence

The fundamental principle of separation of powers and checks and balances under a republican form of
government [means] that the three co-equal branches of government, the executive, legislative and
judicial, are each supreme and independent within the limits of its own sphere. Neither one can
interfere with the performance of the duties of the other. Our Constitution "as 'a definition of the
powers of government' placed upon the judiciary the great burden of 'determining the nature, scope
and extent of such powers' and 'when the judiciary mediates to allocate constitutional boundaries, it
does not assert any superiority over the other departments .. but only asserts the solemn and sacred
obligation entrusted to it by the Constitution to determine conflicting claims of authority under the
Constitution and to establish for the parties in an actual controversy the rights which the instrument
secures and guarantees to them.'"