Panel begins hearings on CA row

MANILA, Philippines – The panel created by the Supreme Court to probe the alleged bribery try on a justice of the Court of Appeals (CA) buckles down to work today as it holds an organizational meeting to determine the number and sequences of witnesses to be summoned.

Court spokesman Midas Marquez told reporters yesterday that the three-member panel, composed of retired Supreme Court justices, will start their hearings tomorrow.

The hearings will be held daily until Aug. 21 when the panel is expected to submit its findings and recommendations to the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA), an office under the Supreme Court.

According to Marquez, the proceedings will be similar to an oral argument and will be open to the media and the public. Television cameras, however, will not be allowed.

The Court had earlier formed the panel to be led by retired justice Carolina Griño-Aquino with retired justices Romeo Callejo and Flerida Ruth Romero as members.

The panel was also tasked by the Court to probe the alleged impropriety committed by the CA justices in handling the Meralco board election row.

Last July 31, after conducting a rare en banc session, the CA ordered the feuding justices in the Meralco case to submit to the investigation of the OCA.

This, after a letter to CA Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez from Justice Jose Sabio, acting chair of the dissolved Special Ninth Division that had handled the case and one of the justices involved in the controversy, was made public.

In a six-page letter dated July 26, Sabio alleged that a businessman brokering for one of the parties had offered him P10 million to inhibit from the case.

According to Sabio, he refused the bribe offer, as a “matter of principle.”

The Meralco board election triggered a feud between the group headed by the Lopez family and the group representing the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS).

“In the past few days, the Court of Appeals has been the subject of comments in the print and broadcast media involving the actuations of some of its members relative to the Meralco vs. GSIS case. Insinuations and accusations have been made to the prejudice of the institution,” the CA said in a press statement.

Aside from the order for the involved justices to appear before the OCA, the CA also left the matter concerning the validity of the decision to the parties to take whatever steps they may deem appropriate in the usual course of procedure.

The CA also appealed to everyone to “respect the sub judice nature of the case and to refrain from public discussion of the merits of the case.”

‘Holding on’

Earlier, Justice Vicente Roxas, the ponente or writer of the decision, lashed out at Justices Sabio and Myrna Vidal for “clinging on” to the Meralco case despite the fact that the Eight Division had already taken over the case from the disbanded Special Ninth Division where they were previously together.

The Special Ninth Division was disbanded following the July 4 reorganization of the CA divisions with the retirement of Justice Rodrigo Cosico.

“After the July 4, 2008 reorganization, there was no basis for Justices Sabio and Vidal of the disbanded Special Ninth Division to break this IRCA rule and the tradition of transparency by clinging on to the Meralco case,” Roxas said.

Roxas also said that Sabio was a mere substitute in the disbanded Special Ninth Division and was expected to serve only for the duration of the temporary leave of the division’s regular chairman, Justice Beinvenido Reyes.

“Justice Sabio should have relinquished when regular chairman Justice Reyes reported back to work,” he said.

According to Roxas, Reyes reported back to work as chairman on June 16, 2008 but Sabio allegedly refused to relinquish chairmanship and even presided over the June 23, 2008 oral arguments.

Roxas said Reyes did not want to make a scene at the hearing and could only get as far as having his nameplate displayed on the table.

The CA’s Committee on Rules chaired by Associate Justice Edgardo Cruz ruled that Sabio should not have insisted on being acting chair of the Special Ninth Division, which handled the Meralco case, as Reyes had already returned from his leave.

Meanwhile, senators expressed different views on the appointment of the three retired justices to the panel that will look into the alleged impropriety committed by the CA justices.

Sen. Joker Arroyo said he would have preferred that the SC itself acted on the issue.

“With all due respect, it would be preferable, to assuage the pains and anxiety of the trial bar, that the investigation of the Court of Appeals scandal be conducted by the Supreme Court itself, or by a committee of sitting justices, rather than delegating the investigation to a panel of retired justices who in turn will submit their findings to the High Court for review and determination, akin to a trial by commissioners,” Arroyo said.

“What happened is too heinous, alleged bribery and case grabbing, there is no substitute perhaps to the High Court hearing it first hand,” Arroyo said.

Unassailable reputation

However, Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago expressed high regard for the committee while Sen. Pia Cayetano said the people should give the panel a chance.

“These three retired justices have the highest reputation in the legal profession… But in any event, these justices enjoy a very high reputation for probity so I am sure that their findings will be highly authoritative,” Santiago said. “I am very happy about this development, plus the Supreme Court has even given them a deadline. So that is a signal the SC is sending that under the leadership of Chief Justice Reynato Puno it is very serious about the question of corruption in the Court of Appeals.”

Santiago noted that Justice Aquino was an Ilongga like her and enjoys the distinction of being the first female in Philippine history to pass the bar exams.

Justice Romero was Santiago’s professor at the University of the Philippines and former director of the UP Law Center. One of the hallmarks of Romero’s term is that she was the first justice to write her decisions in Filipino.

“As I said yesterday, I confirm the expression of some that in the legal profession the Court of Appeals is notorious for bribery,” Cayetano said.

“I’d like to think that there is fairness, and that the output is going to be a product of fair and honest investigation. Let’s not judge them. Let’s just put the burden on them to come out with a fair and honest investigation. We cannot second-guess them. Let’s just hope that they will base their decision on sound principle,” she said. – With Christina Mendez