|
Saturday, May 13, 2006
Judge warns City Hall on BOT case
By Danilo V. Adorador III
CAGAYAN de Oro officials may be cited in contempt while the lawyers representing them in a contract-nullification suit may be disbarred, after a regional magistrate found the parties employing "deceitful" maneuvers to have the case in question dismissed.
In a strongly worded omnibus decision issued early this week, local court Judge Ma. Anita Lucagbo ordered the controversial Build-Operate-Transfer (BOT) case revived, saying the court had been "misled" by government lawyers in junking the suit earlier.
Lucagbo was particularly vexed upon discovering the existence of the BOT contract, which several Cogon market vendors wanted the court to void contending that the agreement contained detrimental provisions, both to their interest and that of the City Government.
The court said keeping under wraps, the contract amounts to obstruction of justice.
The magistrate also delivered a stinging rebuke against City Legal Officer Mart Maandig and Majority Floor Leader Edgar Cabanlas for throwing legal ethics to the wind.
The court is giving Cabanlas, Maandig, and all parties of the case, including Mayor Vicente Emano and Yian Ping of the UKC Builders, 15 days from receipt of the order to explain why they should not be cited in contempt.
Likewise, the court said Maandig and Cabanlas may face disbarment, adding that lawyers have more to answer under the Code of Professional Responsibility.
The court's dismissal of the case early this year was prompted by the respondents' assertion that there was no Memorandum of Agreement, which as a result states that "there was nothing to annul."
However, when the plaintiffs filed a motion for reconsideration with the attached BOT contract last April, Lucagbo said: "Defendants even have the gall to ask what is there to amend if there is no agreement executed by parties?"
Maandig had earlier defended their denial of the contract, saying they rightly did so since the term used by plaintiffs to describe the contract in their complaint was not "contract but memorandum of agreement."
The court also junked the respondents' argument that the case can't be re-opened since it was already decided with finality.
It took exception to the respondents' suggestion that plaintiffs may still re-file the case, noting the "hassle and inconvenience in time and money that plaintiffs may undergo once more, all because defendants misled plaintiffs in denying the existence of the agreement."
Cabanlas and Maandig were out of their respective offices when Sun.Star Cagayan de Oro tried to reach them for comments Friday afternoon.
(May 13, 2006 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here.
Join the Sun.Star message board. Click here. |
|
[return to top]
[home]
[network page]
|
LOCAL NEWS
BUSINESS
OPINION
SPORTS
LIFESTYLE
FEATURE
SUPERBALITA
|
