MANILA, Philippines - Another magistrate of the Court of Appeals (CA) has inhibited from handling the second suspension of Makati City Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr.
Associate Justice Franchito Diamante was assigned as one of two additional members of the CA’s special 9th Division to resolve Binay’s petition questioning his second suspension by the Office of the Ombudsman in connection with the allegedly overpriced construction of the Makati Science High School Building (MSHSB).
Diamante inhibited from the case because he is a member of the appellate court’s internal committee tasked to probe the bribery allegations of Sen. Antonio Trillanes against two fellow justices who issued a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the first preventive suspension order issued against Binay.
He is the fourth CA justice to inhibit from the case. The others were Associate Justices Celia Librea-Leagogo, Priscilla Baltazar–Padilla and Ramon Paul Hernando.
Following Diamante’s inhibition, Associate Justice Romero Barza was picked to handle the case.
The other members of the special CA division are Associate Justices Socorro Inting Melchor Sadang, Amy Lazaro-Javier and Rodil Zalameda.
The CA earlier failed to rule on the case after casting a 2-1 vote, prompting the creation of a division of five as required under the rules.
Meanwhile, the Supreme Court (SC) was urged to resolve Binay’s first suspension over the allegedly anomalous Makati City Hall Building 2.
With the election season approaching, former law deans Pacifico Agabin and Amado Valdez said the SC should rule whether the appellate court has authority to restrain suspension orders issued by the ombudsman.
Agabin and Valdez agreed that the ombudsman’s petition, which questioned the TRO stopping the first suspension order against Binay should be resolved before the mayor’s term ends next year.
“The case must be expedited because his term is expiring,” said Valdez, former law dean at the University of the East.
Agabin said the high court need not resolve the issue involving the controversial condonation doctrine.
“The SC can resolve the case even on the aspect on the CA’s authority to stop the ombudsman’s preventive suspension,” he explained.
Asked what would be the implication if the SC fails to resolve the case before May 2016, Valdez said: “If the high court decides later, the decision will serve as precedent on future cases.”
Trillanes wants libel raps dismissed
Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV has sought the dismissal of the libel case filed against him by Binay over the bribery allegations in the CA.
In his reply-affidavit, Trillanes again invoked his parliamentary immunity, saying his statements about the bribery were “in the performance of his official duties as a member of the legislature.”
He has failed to present evidence to prove his claim that Binay bribed two CA justices with P25 million each to stop his suspension.
Trillanes claimed that he has witnesses to support his allegations but they are not willing to come out.