MANILA, Philippines—In contrast to the relatively uneventful opening day of the investigation into the Court of Appeals bribery scandal on Thursday, Friday’s hearing generated enough heat to fan the controversy even more.
Some of the appellate justices ended up getting a scolding from a member of the three-person investigating panel for offenses ranging from signing a decision that was made without conducting deliberations, personally carrying “voluminous” case records in a traveling bag, and using the word “dedma” (to ignore or show no reaction to someone or something).
At least three justices figured in heated exchanges, prompting a rebuke from the panel of retired Supreme Court justices composed of Carolina Grińo-Aquino, Flerida Ruth Romero and Romeo Callejo Sr.
Justices Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal and Jose Sabio Sr., who were upbraided by Callejo, immediately apologized for not following court procedures and internal rules.
The unprecedented investigation into the Court of Appeals came about because of a conflict over which justices should handle a case involving a petition of Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) to stop the move of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) to annul the results of Meralco’s board election in May.
Sabio was acting chairman of the Court of Appeals’ Ninth Division that initially heard the case and had issued a restraining order against the SEC, which had ordered a stop to the counting of proxy votes of the Lopez group in the May 27 board elections. Vidal and Associate Justice Vicente Roxas were members of the division.
Trigger
However, on July 23, the court’s Eighth Division, chaired by Justice Vicente Reyes, issued a ruling deciding the case, voiding the SEC order and upholding Meralco’s argument that the SEC had no jurisdiction. It was Roxas who penned the decision.
The 8th Division decision triggered an internal protest among the appellate court’s justices, particularly Vidal and Sabio, who said that there was something “fishy” in the way the case was transferred from the 9th to the 8th Division.
Vidal and Sabio said a decision on the case, also penned by Roxas, that Vidal had signed on July 8 had been withdrawn on the ground that it was missing certain pages. They said they later learned that Roxas had brought the case to the 8th Division headed by Reyes.
Sabio then alleged that he had been offered a P10-million bribe by businessman Francis de Borja, allegedly acting for Meralco chair Manolo Lopez, to relinquish the case. De Borja denied the accusation, alleging in turn that Sabio had hinted that he might be persuaded by a P50-million bribe.
Reminder to be civil
Friday’s hearing began with tense exchanges between Sabio and Roxas. The panel reminded them to be civil to each other.
“We are all justices here. Please be civil to each other. Even ordinary counsels and witnesses are accorded respect,” Callejo said.
Under the hearing’s rules, a witness may be cross-examined by other witnesses regarding what he wrote in his affidavit submitted to the panel. The panelists may also ask clarificatory questions.
Sabio also had a heated exchange with Justice Edgardo Cruz, chairman of the Court of Appeals’ internal rules committee, which came out with an opinion supporting Reyes’ jurisdiction on the case.
Sabio claimed the decision was a mere opinion of Cruz’s, but Cruz said Court of Appeals Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr. had authorized him to rule on the controversy. Cruz admitted that he ruled alone and did not convene his committee, which only had two members then.
Cruz was irked when Sabio said he doubted there was an authorization from Vasquez, adding that these could all be part of a “drama” concocted by Reyes’ camp.
Cruz commented that Sabio probably does not even trust his own colleagues in the court, to which the latter retorted: “That’s your judgment, I choose who I believe.”
Callejo said the feuding justices should have waited for the committee to formally rule on the dispute, and all proceedings should have been deferred.
He also pointed out that Sabio could have insisted that the committee rule on the dispute through Vasquez instead of calling another justice, Martin Villarama Jr., to comment on the dispute.
Lesson learned
“You should not just consult any member of the court, if you don’t agree with Cruz’s position, then you should insist that the committee decide. This could have been avoided,” Callejo said.
Sabio said he had learned his lesson and apologized to the panel.
Sabio again got a scolding from Callejo for continuing to talk to De Borja even after the latter had allegedly approached him with a bribe offer.
Callejo said that “when a party tries to approach us and talks about a case,” a justice of the court should say, “Stop, goodbye.”
That may sound rude but someone approaching a justice to talk about a case is already being disrespectful, he said.
“‘Stop that, goodbye,’ period, then leave him,” Callejo told Sabio. “The moment he tried to talk to you about the case, he does not respect you. You should have left.”
Vidal, who admitted signing on July 8 a decision presented to her by Roxas even if the parties had yet to submit their memoranda on the case, earned a rebuke from Callejo.
No deliberations
Answering a series of questions from Callejo, she said she signed the copies of a supposedly final decision on the Meralco case that Roxas had brought to her office on July 8 even without deliberations being conducted on it. She said it was the usual practice in many divisions.
Callejo reminded her that was contrary to court rules.
Vidal justified her decision to sign, saying that she believed Roxas when he said it was “a matter of urgency.”
But when Callejo asked what the urgency was about, Vidal replied she did not ask Roxas. She later added that it was “for Justice Roxas to answer,” eliciting laughter from the audience. Callejo was not amused.
“Do not just rely on the word of our colleagues; you must conduct your own research and study so that we can serve the people judiciously. Otherwise you’ll only be a robot,” Callejo said.
Signed were drafts
Callejo also asked why Vidal signed the copy even if a pending motion for Roxas to inhibit himself remained unresolved.
“It was improper for the court to proceed with the hearing without Justice Roxas resolving the motion,” he said.
Vidal replied that she brought the decision home, studied it and did her own research. She said she agreed with its contents. She said she gave the decision back to Roxas the next day and was hurt when she found that another division came out with a decision and that the documents she had signed were mere drafts.
It turned out that deliberations on the case were conducted by Reyes and Roxas, together with Justice Apolinario Bruselas Jr. The Eighth Division eventually came out with the decision dismissing the case in favor of Meralco on July 23.
Callejo said he hoped Vidal learned her lesson and the latter also apologized for the lapses she had committed.
And then there was the question of Roxas’s traveling bag.
According to Vidal, Roxas was carrying the “voluminous” records of the case when he went to her office to personally bring her the copy of the decision that he had penned.
‘Most unusual’
She noted that the bag that Roxas carried was “expensive-looking,” which she and her staff found to be “most unusual.”
Earlier in the hearing, Sabio also described Roxas’ actions as curious, noting that most justices would send copies of decisions for signature to one another through their staff, never personally.
Perhaps Roxas distrusted his staff so he personally brought the case records and the copy of the decision he had penned, said Vidal.
Roxas refused to speak to reporters during the break.
Tragic
Callejo also found “tragic” Sabio’s use of the word “dedma” in conversation with Vidal. Sabio used the same word when he described to reporters on Thursday how he felt when he saw businessman Francis de Borja, whom he is accusing of attempting to bribe him with P10 million but who instead accused him of demanding P50 million.
“That is what is so tragic in this case, that justices, in the performance of their duties, [use] words such as ‘dedma.’ It is so tragic,” he said. Callejo told Vidal: “Forget the word ‘dedma.’” With editing by INQUIRER.net
