Gov’t lawyers scored for using Wikipedia in the past face new charges
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has filed administrative charges against two of its senior counsels for causing “undue delay” in a case assigned to them.
The two—Assistant Solicitor General Rex Bernardo Pascual and Senior Solicitor II Bernadette Esguerra—are the same government lawyers who were rebuked last year by the Court of Appeals for citing the online reference website Wikipedia to argue the government’s opposition to an annulment case instead of diligently looking for expert testimony.
This time, the two are accused of causing “undue delay” in the litigation of another annulment case filed in a regional trial court in Davao City.
Documents obtained by the Inquirer showed that they were facing investigation for their purported failure to attend court proceedings for the pending case in Davao more than a year ago.
According to the documents, the two OSG officials failed to deputize other government lawyers to take over the case in their behalf. They were also unable to file the necessary pleadings with the court “which unnecessarily delayed the resolution of the annulment case,” it added.
“(Pascual and Esguerra have) not taken any action thereon, to the prejudice of the petitioner and, inevitably, caused delay in the court proceedings,” the OSG said.
In his letter to Solicitor General Jose Anselmo Cadiz, Pascual apologized for the delay in the litigation of the case, but insisted that he was not remiss in referring all the necessary pleadings and orders to Esguerra, “whom the undersigned relies upon for compliance with the above.”
For her part, Esguerra explained that her failure to order the deputation of the case was “due to inadvertence.”
In July 2010, the OSG was chided by the Court of Appeals for citing a Wikipedia entry on mental health disorders instead of getting an expert witness to debunk the argument of a woman who was seeking to void her marriage on grounds of psychological incapacity.
“The Republic, with all the resources and manpower at its disposal, has all the means with which to counter the expert testimony offered by [the ex-wife]. Most certainly, the Republic has access to government institutions, i.e., National Center for Mental Health, which has qualified psychiatric experts whose opinions it could have sought to evaluate [the woman] and her spouse,” the appellate court said.
The assailed pleading in that particular case was prepared by Pascual and Esguerra, documents showed. Marlon Ramos
