Case filed vs. COA Manila officials to be heard here
April 17, 2006 | 12:00am
The Supreme Court has allowed Regional Trial Court judge Geraldine Faith Econg to continue handling the civil case filed by Cebuano-GSIS general manager Winston Garcia against six officials of the Commission on Audit.
This after the Supreme Court's third division rejected the petition of the COA officials that the venue of the hearing of the case be transferred from Cebu City to any court in the National Capital Region.
The respondents Raquel Habitan, Leonor Baodo, Joel Estolatan, Rhoda Pileña, Alexander Juliano and Rosalinda Salvador, claimed that Cebu is not the proper venue for the trial of their case.
Aside from the grounds of improper venue, the COA officials also claimed that the case lack of cause of action, lack of jurisdiction and if it will continue, their rights to due process will be violated.
The COA officials also failed to convince the justices by saying that the courts in Cebu may be influenced by the Garcia's political clout, because Winston is the brother of Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia and son of the former governor.
But the Supreme Court said "the holding of a high government position does not ipso facto prove that the holder of the position will use his or her power and influence to secure judgment in his favor from the courts of law."
The SC further said that the COA officials have failed to present proof showing that the Garcia and his family had at one time or another used their political clout to unduly pressure judges to decide cases in their favor.
"The claim of petitioners is, at best, speculative," the Supreme Court ruled.
Habitan is an assistant commissioner of the Commission on Audit based in Manila, while the rest of the defendants are members of the special audit team that Habitan created to investigate the transactions of the GSIS.
Garcia filed a civil suit before the court in Cebu against the Manila-based COA officials and demanded P2.3 million in damages and compensation for issuing of reports containing findings and observations that Garcia and other GSIS officials have violated the provisions of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.
But the defendants' lawyer, Alberto Habitan, who is the husband of the COA official, described the move of Garcia of filing a case against the defendants in Cebu as a way to harass them because they are living in Manila. - Rene U. Borromeo
This after the Supreme Court's third division rejected the petition of the COA officials that the venue of the hearing of the case be transferred from Cebu City to any court in the National Capital Region.
The respondents Raquel Habitan, Leonor Baodo, Joel Estolatan, Rhoda Pileña, Alexander Juliano and Rosalinda Salvador, claimed that Cebu is not the proper venue for the trial of their case.
Aside from the grounds of improper venue, the COA officials also claimed that the case lack of cause of action, lack of jurisdiction and if it will continue, their rights to due process will be violated.
The COA officials also failed to convince the justices by saying that the courts in Cebu may be influenced by the Garcia's political clout, because Winston is the brother of Cebu Governor Gwendolyn Garcia and son of the former governor.
But the Supreme Court said "the holding of a high government position does not ipso facto prove that the holder of the position will use his or her power and influence to secure judgment in his favor from the courts of law."
The SC further said that the COA officials have failed to present proof showing that the Garcia and his family had at one time or another used their political clout to unduly pressure judges to decide cases in their favor.
"The claim of petitioners is, at best, speculative," the Supreme Court ruled.
Habitan is an assistant commissioner of the Commission on Audit based in Manila, while the rest of the defendants are members of the special audit team that Habitan created to investigate the transactions of the GSIS.
Garcia filed a civil suit before the court in Cebu against the Manila-based COA officials and demanded P2.3 million in damages and compensation for issuing of reports containing findings and observations that Garcia and other GSIS officials have violated the provisions of the anti-graft and corrupt practices act.
But the defendants' lawyer, Alberto Habitan, who is the husband of the COA official, described the move of Garcia of filing a case against the defendants in Cebu as a way to harass them because they are living in Manila. - Rene U. Borromeo
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
Latest
Recommended