For exercising his authority as mandated by the PBA Constitution and By-Laws, Eala was sued by Taulava for contempt. Taulava insisted the order he got from the Quezon City Regional Trial Court was mandatory and immediately executory, meaning Eala had no legal basis to prevent him from resuming to play in the PBA.
"My neck is on the line," continued Eala. "I have to sacrifice to keep the integrity of the championship whole. Questions of eligibility are determined by the commissioner in accordance with the provisions of the PBA’s by-laws, not by the courts."
A well-known lawyer said the PBA should’ve stopped Taulava from playing in Game 1 on the basis of his suspension by the league to establish jurisdiction on the case. He added that for Eala to be found guilty of contempt of court, malice must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. And the hearings could drag beyond the duration of the Finals.
The lawyer explained that no court of law has jurisdiction over the PBA which is ruled by its own laws.
Two days after the mandatory court order was issued, the PBA filed a motion for reconsideration.
"If the courts dismiss the PBA’s motion of reconsideration, it will mean Taulava had the right to play Game 1 all along," said the lawyer. "Will it mean reversing the forfeiture? This is a potential problem for the PBA. It’s not right to decide the outcome of a basketball game outside of the playing floor. It’s not fair to the fans and the players. If the PBA established its jurisdiction from the start, that would’ve been the issue to be ruled by the courts and debate on it could take forever."
Of course, the PBA will elevate the case to the Court of Appeals if its motion for reconsideration is denied. Once the order is appealed, the PBA will likely try to get a temporary restraining order to keep Taulava in cold storage.
The unfolding legal war will be tedious and ugly. Taulava has launched a media campaign to put Eala on the defensive. Clearly, the attack is personal. Taulava probably thinks he’s being singled out by the commissioner and that’s why he couldn’t care less if bridges are burned in the heat of the battle.
What Taulava fails to understand is the PBA wouldn’t have suspended him and five others if the Department of Justice (DOJ) didn’t cite them for misrepresentation in applying for Filipino citizenship. That is the issue–no more, no less.
If Taulava sincerely wants to prove he’s half-Filipino, he should do it in the proper forum and convince the DOJ to swallow its words. Only then can the PBA reinstate him as a player, according to a Board resolution.
But instead of taking the bull by the horns, Taulava swept the dirt under the rug and went after the tail. He sought a judgment from the courts to catapult him back into the PBA without respecting the league rules.
On the case of two men delivering a Talk ‘N’ Text letter to his children’s home last weekend, Eala said the Board will likely create a committee to determine if sanction is necessary. Eala will inhibit himself from hearing the case.
"This is no longer just about the Finals," the source said, quoting the member. "This is about a franchise doing what it wants to do regardless of the Board’s decision."
If the PBA is forced to reinstate Taulava because of a court order against its own rules, all hell will break loose in sports.
It’s a dangerous precedent.
Imagine a situation where in a boxing match, Manny Pacquiao is held to a split draw by Juan Manuel Marquez and the judge who scored it even later admits he made a mistake in scoring a round and his tally should’ve been a one-point lead for the Filipino.
Is it right for Pacquiao to go to court and ask for a change in the decision? Under boxing rules, no decision may be changed unless there is proof of a mathematical error in calculation or malicious wrong-doing. A judge’s admission of an honest mistake is not ground to change a decision.
If the court interferes in the scoring process, what will now stop a fighter from protesting a referee’s stoppage of a bout?
What will now stop an athlete from going to court to question a decision by a National Sports Association suspending him for whatever violation?
The argument that a court order supersedes a league decision is hogwash. The PBA has its own rules and no court can dictate on the league to change its rules to suit the whims of any player. A player must abide by the rules of the league where he plays. If he refuses to play by the rules, he has the option of a graceful exit.
Hauling Eala to court is in bad taste. The commissioner isn’t acting on his own. He’s guided by the PBA Constitution and By-Laws. He acts on the authority given to him by the Board of Governors.
It is an act of cowardice for Taulava to turn his brazen attempt to force his reinstatement, in disregard of PBA rules, into a personal attack on Eala.
Eala isn’t the issue. The court order isn’t the issue. Whether Taulava is half-Filipino or not is the issue and that is what he must address to gain public sympathy.