CA justice sacked

MANILA, Philippines – The Court of Appeals justice who wrote the decision declaring the Securities and Exchange Commission has no jurisdiction over the case of Manila Electric Co. vs. the Government Service Insurance System was dismissed from the judiciary by the Supreme Court yesterday.

Voting 12-1, the SC also stripped Justice Vicente Roxas of all his benefits and barred him from employment in any branch of government, including government-owned and controlled corporations.

Based on the findings of a three-member investigative body, the SC found Roxas guilty of multiple violations of the Code of Judicial Conduct, grave misconduct, dishonesty, undue interest and conduct prejudicial to the best interest of the service.

The panel was composed of retired SC justices Carolina Griño Aquino, Flerida Ruth Romero and Romeo Callejo Sr.

The SC also sanctioned CA Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr., who was severely reprimanded for his “failure to act promptly and decisively” to avert the incidents that damaged the CA’s image.

He was warned that a similar incident in the future would warrant a harsher penalty.

Justice Jose Sabio Jr., who blew the whistle on alleged anomalies in the CA, was suspended for two months without pay, with a stern warning that a repetition of the same or similar acts would warrant a more severe penalty.

Sabio was found guilty of simple misconduct and conduct unbecoming of a Court of Appeals justice.

Bienvenido Reyes, a member of the Division that ruled that SEC has no jurisdiction in the Meralco v. GSIS case, was reprimanded after being found guilty of simple misconduct with mitigating circumstance.

Justice Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal, who signed the decision against the SEC without reading it, was found guilty of improprieties and ethical lapses, and conduct unbecoming of a CA justice.

She was admonished “to be more circumspect in the discharge of her judicial duties.”

The panel found Vidal “too compliant” when she deviated from the CA’s internal rules and allowed herself to be rushed by Roxas into signing the Meralco decision on July 8, 2008 without reading the parties’ memorandums and without any deliberation among members of the division.

“She knew that the TRO would not expire until July 30, 2008 – some three weeks away from July 8, 2008 – yet she allowed herself to believe Justice Roxas’ misrepresentation that signing the decision was urgent,” read the panel report.

“Her compliance with certain dissembling practices of other justices of the Court, in violation of the IRCA, showed weakness and lack of independence on her part.”

The SC referred to the Office of the Bar Confidant the action against Presidential Commission on Good Government Chairman Camilo Sabio for trying to influence the judgment of his brother, Jose, on a case before the CA.

Lawyer Midas Marquez, SC spokesman, said Justice Sabio’s allegation that businessman Francis de Borja had tried to offer him a P10-million bribe will be referred to the Department of Justice.

Marquez said of the SC 15 justices, Chief Justice Reynato Puno and Associate Justice Antonio Carpio inhibited from the deliberations.

Puno inhibited himself because a daughter of Justice Sabio works in his office.

On the other hand, Carpio’s former law firm represented Meralco in the case before the CA.

It would be recalled that the case started when justices Sabio and Vidal wrote to Vasquez and complained “that they had been unceremoniously ousted” from deciding on the Meralco case when it was transferred from the Special Ninth Division to the Eighth Division.

Marquez told reporters the SC did not investigate Jesus Santos, the lawyer of First Gentleman Miguel Arroyo as there was no evidence to show that he had talked with any CA justices regarding the Meralco case.

Earlier, Santos said he called up PCGG chairman Sabio, but claimed it was only to seek legal advice from “a long-time friend.”

He was acting as a member of the GSIS board when he called up chairman Sabio, and that he did not consider him as a brother of justice Sabio, he added.

Roxas had another case

Before the Meralco vs. GSIS case, the SC fined Roxas P15,000 for failing to resolve two motions for reconsideration in violation of sec. 9(1), Rule 140 of the Rules of Court, as well as of sec. 5, Canon 6 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary.

In a 15-page resolution written by Justice Renato Corona, the SC en banc also sternly warned Roxas that his commission of any act of impropriety in the future will merit a more severe penalty.

Roxas was charged with dishonesty and grave misconduct, but the SC dismissed these charges and found him liable only for failure to resolve the motion for reconsideration of the Oct. 31, 2006 resolution and accountable for undue delay in resolving the motion for reconsideration of the Jan. 29, 2007 decision.

The Oct. 31, 2006 resolution enjoined the execution for the collection of complainant lawyer Victoriano V. Orocio’s charging lien, while the Jan. 29, 2007 decision, of which he wrote the decision, limited complainant’s collectible attorney’s fees to a maximum of P3.5 million.

Orocio, who acted as counsel for the retired employees of the National Power Corp., had sought the approval of his charging lien before the Quezon City Regional Trial Court, Branch 217 after the parties arrived at an amicable settlement.

The RTC approved his lien and later issued a writ of execution and notice of garnishment in Orocio’s favor.

Subsequently two Napocor directors filed a petition for certiorari with the CA which was raffled to the CA 16th Division with Roxas writing the decision.