Samar PB member wants judge to inhibit from P800M loan case

CATBALOGAN CITY, Philippines — After Samar RTC-29 Judge Agerico Avila dissolved the temporary relief order he earlier issued and dismissed the petitions for certiorari and prohibitions against the P800-million proposed Capitol loan, petitioner Provincial Board Member Alma Uy, on Wednesday asked the judge to inhibit from the case.

Based on her urgent motion for inhibition, Uy argued that Judge Avila’s dismissal order was unwarranted and prematurely taken, and that she “has lost faith” in his neutrality.

Uy contended that the December 28, 2015 hearing set by the RTC was merely for the application of the writ for preliminary injunction, not for the whole case, for which she wanted the court to declare null and void Ordinance No. 14-062-15, which allegedly did not pass through the appropriate process.

Uy said the Avila’s declaration that her petition “lacks factual and legal basis” for its cause of action and that there is “failure to show by clear and convincing evidence” there were irregularities in the passage of the questioned ordinance, was just too premature.

“It was surprising though that a dismissal for the whole case was issued two days before our supposed scheduled hearing set last January 6, and I haven’t even presented my evidences yet because the court hearing is yet to come,” Uy said.

The motion for inhibition also noted that the court last December 14 granted a TRO against the Capitol loan ordinance, thus the case did not lack substance and merit to start with, she argued.

Uy noted further on the order to comment that if the petition is sufficient in form and substance to justify such process, the court shall issue an order requiring the respondent to comment on the petition within 10 days.

Aside from the motion to inhibit, the PB member also said she will be filing, any day within the 15-day period, a motion for reconsideration against the order lifting the TRO.

“He (Avila) should inhibit first, so that another judge will now handle the case. This is still a long way to go and, even if they (at the Capitol) are able to enter and sign the loan contract, it can still be annulled later,” she said.

Avila, in an interview with reporters, clarified that as early as December he could have already come up with a decision based on the available merits presented relative to the case.

As of press time, however, the judge reportedly went on sick leave and was no longer available for clarifications.  (FREEMAN)