Saturday, August 09, 2008 ‘Lapses’ in CA’s dispensation of Meralco case found
SEVERAL “lapses” were uncovered Friday by the Supreme Court (SC) panel at the continuation of its investigation on alleged bribery and other irregularities in the Court of Appeals’ dispensation of the controversial Meralco (Manila Electric Company) case.
Panel member, retired SC justice Romeo Callejo Sr., soundly reprimanded Associate Justice Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal after she admitted that she signed the ponencia of Justice Vicente Roxas without the Special Ninth Division fully deliberating on the final draft of the July 23 decision.
Vidal added that she signed the ponencia despite that the division members have yet to meet to deliberate on the case and to receive the memoranda to be submitted by the parties before a case could be submitted for decision.
She said she did not anymore review the rollo or records of the case because of Roxas’s insistence that there is “urgency” in promulgating the decision immediately in view of the expiring temporary restraining order (TRO) that the division issued on May 30.
She likewise admitted that the division has yet to rule on pending motions of respondent Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) for Roxas to inhibit himself and to lift the TRO.
The justice said at the time that Roxas came to her office for her signature, Associate Justice Jose Sabio, acting chairman of the Special Ninth Division, himself took a leave of absence for a few days.
She said Roxas carried with him what appeared to be “an expensive-looking travel bag” containing the rollo and copies of the decision, an unusual sight since justices usually trusted their respective clerk of court to carry it for them.
She also confirmed Sabio’s testimony that when he returned from his leave, Roxas was “deadma” or ignored his calls for the division to meet up to discuss the Meralco case.
But Callejo said Vidal failed to follow established procedures in the promulgation of a decision when she signed the final draft of the decision based on the mere claim of “urgency” by Roxas.
“What is the urgency? You still have several days before the TRO lapsed. So you swallowed Roxas’s statement hook line and sinker? Is it not an exercise in futility to compel the parties to submit the memorandum and not read it? Is that not ridiculous?” Callejo asked her, to which Vidal answered, “I don’t know about him,” referring to Roxas.
He told her: “Do not rely on other justices, otherwise you are just a robot.”
Callejo further grilled Vidal, asking if she found nothing wrong in the division ruling even before it could rule on the pending motions lodged before it, but the lady justice said she did not notice that these motions were part of the rollo.
Vidal then apologized for what she said was a “lapse” on her part, and for adhering to the “common practice” among the CA magistrates to simply rely on the ponencia even without deliberation prior to the promulgation of a case.
Callejo, who himself was a magistrate of the CA for 10 years prior to his appointment to the SC and as member of the committee on internal rules of the CA, stressed that every justice should read the rollo before a hearing could proceed, or to at least have one meeting among the division members before the decision comes out.
“Is that how the justices of the CA supposed to act? It’s the first time in my 10 years at the CA that I encountered that word, ‘deadma,’ and that is what made this case so tragic,” he said.
He further advised the justices in general that they should act on their own and not rely on their colleagues’ impressions.
“That is the only way that we can assure the people that we can rule judiciously. And forget the word ‘deadma,’” Callejo added.
Sabio, who was the first to take the witness stand, traded caustic words with Roxas, who cross-examined him on the allegations in his affidavit that Roxas’s credibility was tarnished because of several administrative complaints that had been filed against him.
Roxas questioned how he came to learn about it but Sabio refused to divulge his source. He also asked why Sabio should remain in the Special Ninth Division when he knew about the reorganization of the appellate court that exempted no one.
It was at this point that Callejo reminded the two CA magistrates to remain civil to one another and to respect each other as officers of the court.
Meanwhile, CA Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr. said the allegations of bribery and impropriety has put the credibility of the CA at stake.
“It’s only the disgruntled party-litigants who are trying to discredit the court, but we’ve always been credible,” he said.
He also pointed out that the CA is updating its internal rules even before the outbreak of the scandal due to the implementation and inclusion of special laws like the writs of amparo and habeas data in the country’s legal system. (ECV/Sunnex)
