|
Thursday, February 03, 2005
Judge to keep using media for his plea
After the Court of Appeals refused to let him clear his name, Regional Trial Court Branch 24 Judge Olegario Sarmiento Jr. vowed to continue going to the media to present his side.
In a two-page manifestation, Sarmiento said he merely explained his side on the issue, after the news came out about his decision to release, on bail, a person accused of murder.
“It is the feeling of lack of legal remedy that made respondent go to the media. Once the Jan. 19, 2005 resolution sees print and the media would get the public respondent’s reaction, he will go to the media again, especially that there is no more vehicle to put across the legal ground for his motion, after it has been foreclosed by this court,” Sarmiento said in his manifestation.
In a resolution, the CA earlier denied Sarmiento’s motion for leave to file his motion for reconsideration, after the judge aired his side in media interviews.
The CA ruling, penned by Associate Justice Vicente Yap, ruled that Sarmiento forfeited his privilege to clear his name because he took his case to the media.
In an earlier ruling, the CA cited Sarmiento for ignorance of the law after the judge decided to remand the murder case against Anthony John Apura to the Office of the Cebu City Prosecutor.
At the same time, he allowed Apura to post P20,000 bail even if Apura’s case is heinous and not bailable.
The CA also said it has already sent an order for Sarmiento to answer the complaint but the judge did not do so, and instead went to the media to ventilate his concerns.
Apura, Sherwin Que and several unknown persons were charged with murder before the court for allegedly conniving in killing 19-year-old student Mark James Enriquez last July 19, 2003.
But Sarmiento criticized the appellate court for interfering in the case, considering that a separate administrative case against him is pending before the Supreme Court.
In his manifestation, Sarmiento denied he received any order from the CA for him to answer or to comment on the Apura case.
If there was an order sent by the appellate court for him to answer, Sarmiento said it was only for the parricide case against former mayor Ruben Ecleo Jr.
“In others, public respondent (Sarmiento) did and does not care, least, it can be interpreted as having personal interest over the outcome of the petition for certiorari against questioned orders issued by him,” Sarmiento said in his manifestation. (GN)
(February 3, 2005 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
WEEKEND
|
