Quantcast
Article Index |Advertise | Mobile | RSS | Wireless | Newsletter | Archive | Corrections | Syndication | Contact us | About Us| Services
 
  Breaking News :    
Advertisement
Inquirer VDO
Inquirer Mobile

INQUIRER ALERT
Get the free INQUIRER newsletter
Enter your email address:

 
Breaking News / Metro Type Size: (+) (-)
You are here: Home > News > Breaking News > Metro

  ARTICLE SERVICES      
     Reprint this article     Print this article  
    Send Feedback  
    Post a comment   Share  

  RELATED STORIES  




imns



SC cites Lozanos for contempt over ‘attacks’

By Tetch Torres
INQUIRER.net
First Posted 15:20:00 10/29/2009

Filed Under: Judiciary (system of justice), Punishment

MANILA, Philippines ? For their ?scurrilous attacks? on the Supreme Court, a father and daughter were cited for indirect contempt.

In a resolution by the high court?s Special Second Division, lawyer Oliver Lozano was fined P10,000 while daughter Evangeline, also a lawyer, was reprimanded.

"A commission of the same or similar acts shall be dealt with more severely,? the high court said.

"The Lozanos' scurrilous attacks on the character and integrity of Justice [Dante] Tinga and the hardworking employees of the Court, punctuated as they are with vile, intemperate and libelous language, degrade the dignity of the Court and denigrate the trust and respect that should be accorded the judiciary to maintain and uphold the highest ideals of justice." the high court said.

"The statements of the Lozanos assail not only the integrity of the decisions and resolutions of the Court, but also their genuineness."

The case stemmed from a motion for reconsideration filed by
Lozano against the high court?s decision, which Tinga had authored, to uphold the Court of Appeals? ruling that found Dominador Malana and Rodel Tiaga guilty of the complex crime of murder with frustrated murder and attempted murder.

Lozano sought the inhibition of Tinga.

In his appeal, Lozano said the high court ignored "the main defense," adding that ?such oppression resulting in conviction committed by a Supreme Court justice constitutes the highest form of rendering unjust verdict."

But Tinga refused to inhibit.

Lozano filed a motion asking that he be allowed to file a second motion for reconsideration, which noted that in the denial of his first appeal, Tinga ?ignored, misappreciated, and misinterpreted the physical facts, evidence and circumstances. There is a travesty and mockery of justice indicating that all along the accused were deprived of fair play, due process or cold neutrality," Lozano said.



Copyright 2012 INQUIRER.net. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.



Share

RELATED STORIES:

OTHER STORIES:



  ^ Back to top

© Copyright 2001-2012 INQUIRER.net, An INQUIRER Company

The INQUIRER Network: HOME | NEWS | SPORTS | SHOWBIZ & STYLE | TECHNOLOGY | BUSINESS | OPINION | GLOBAL NATION | Site Map
Services: Advertise | Buy Content | Wireless | Newsletter | Low Graphics | Search / Archive | Article Index | Contact us
The INQUIRER Company: About the Inquirer | User Agreement | Link Policy | Privacy Policy

Advertisement
Megaworld
TAGAYTAY FONTAINE VILLAS
Property Guide
Pacquiao