|
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Sanctions recommended vs CA justices in bribe row
MANILA -- Five out of eight magistrates of the Court of Appeals (CA) have been recommended for sanction by the three-man panel created by the Supreme Court (SC) to investigate alleged improprieties and bribery on the Meralco ownership case.
The SC is set to rule or adopt the report and recommendations of the panel composed of retired SC justices Carolina Grino-Aquino, Flerida Ruth Romero, and Romeo Callejo during its en banc session on Tuesday.
What's your take on the Mindanao crisis? Discuss views with other readers
A reliable source at the SC who was able to get hold of the panel report named the CA associate justices as Vicente Roxas, Jose Sabio Jr., Bienvenido Reyes, Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal, and Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr.
Quoting the panel's report, the source stated: "The investigation has revealed irregularities and improprieties committed by CA justices in connection with the Meralco case, docketed as GR-SP 103692, which are detrimental to the proper administration of justice and damaging to the institution's integrity, independence, and public respect for the judiciary."
Roxas, who penned the controversial July 23 decision stating that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has no jurisdiction to validate the proxy votes counted in favor of the Lopez-bloc of Meralco, was reportedly sanctioned for alleged irregularity and improper conduct in coming out with that decision and alleged fabrication of the supposed transcript of deliberations of the division before promulgation.
Similar sanctions was reportedly meted on Sabio after he admitted during the panel hearings that his brother, Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) chairman Camilo Sabio, called him up twice to influence him on the position of the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), which has a big stake in Meralco, and to relinquish his position as acting chairman of the Special Ninth Division.
He was likewise reprimanded for discussing the Meralco case with businessman Francis de Borja, whom he accused of offering him a P10 million bribe. Such an act, the panel said, was "highly appropriate and indiscreet."
Vidal, who was a member of the Special Ninth Division stripped of the authority to rule on the Meralco case and which had Sabio as acting chairman, was found by the panel to be "too compliant" when she allowed herself to sign the decision without reading the parties' memorandum.
Reyes was likewise penalized for discourtesy to the CA presiding justice when the Eighth Division, which he chaired, proceeded with the promulgation of the Meralco case when the chairmanship row between him and Sabio has not been resolved yet.
Vasquez, for his part, was castigated by the panel for his "failed leadership as head of the CA" resulting in his mishandling of the "turmoil arising from the Meralco case" as a result of his failure to immediately resolve the chairmanship row between Reyes and Sabio.
The panel, however, did not make any particular recommendation as to what sanctions should be imposed on the justices, who were found to have been liable for malfeasance, misfeasance, improprieties, and violations of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary.
Of the eight justices caught in the controversy, only Associate Justices Martin Villarama Jr., Edgardo Cruz, and Apolinario Bruselas have not been meted administrative sanctions.
SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the report of the panel recommending the imposition of administrative sanctions on the CA justices might subject the ponencia of Roxas to a review by the SC.
Marquez noted that there are two pending cases with the high court: that of the separate petitions filed by the Office of the Solicitor General, representing the SEC, and the GSIS petition questioning the validity of the Roxas ponencia.
The two cases, he said, will likely be consolidated.
"The SC decision on the report of the panel on the bribery case at the CA will impact highly on the Meralco case. The CA decision will be referred for inclusion in the records of the two petitions filed by the SEC and GSIS," he said.
Marquez also declined to comment on the panel report as claimed by a court source, saying it might preempt the decision of the SC, which will decide on Tuesday whether to adopt in whole or modify the panel's recommendations.
Should there be any dismissals among the justices involved, Marquez added that the decision of the SC will likely be "per curiam," meaning, the court will decide as a body and the justice who will write the ponencia will not be named.
Meanwhile, Senior Associate Justice Leonardo Quisumbing has also sought to inhibit himself from the deliberations on the panel report after learning that Roxas's middle name is "Quisumbing."
Marquez said the SC justice is not aware if he and Roxas are distantly related.
Aside from Quisumbing, three other justices have earlier inhibited themselves from the case, namely: Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Justices Antonio Carpio and Consuelo Ynares Santiago.
Puno inhibited himself on the ground that one of Sabio's daughters is his staff. Carpio inhibited himself as his former law firm is representing Meralco against GSIS.
Santiago, for her part, cited her daughter working for Meralco as a reason for her inhibition. (ECV/Sunnex)
For more Philippine news, visit Sun.Star Baguio. (September 9, 2008 issue)
Write letter to the editor. Click here. |
|
|
|
[return to top]
[home]
|
|
