Pharmally exec files admin complaint vs CA justice for 'continued inaction' | Inquirer News
Close  

Pharmally exec files admin complaint vs CA justice for ‘continued inaction’

/ 07:30 PM April 07, 2022
Pharmally exec files admin complaint vs CA justice for 'continued inaction'

Mohit Dargani SENATE SCREEN GRAB

MANILA, Philippines — Pharmally executive Mohit Dargani has filed an administrative complaint against a Court of Appeals associate justice for alleged undue delay in the disposition of an urgent case.

Dargani remained at the Pasay City Jail since November 2021 after he and his sister, Twinkle, were cited for contempt by the Senate blue ribbon committee during its investigation of the government’s procurement of COVID-19 supplies.

ADVERTISEMENT

“The continued inaction of the Respondent Justice, as the presiding Justice and ponente of the case, shows that he has decided to shirk on his duty as a magistrate and to turn a blind eye to the plight of a person whose constitutional rights have been gravely violated,” Dargani’s complaint reads.

CA Associate Justice Apolinario D. Bruselas Jr. is the presiding justice of the special division where the Darganis lodged their habeas corpus cases.

FEATURED STORIES

On March 1, the appeals court already issued a ruling dismissing the habeas corpus case filed by Twinkle Dargani for being moot and academic because she was already ordered released by the Senate blue ribbon panel.

READ: Moot and academic: CA junks Twinkle Dargani’s bid for habeas corpus

According to Bruselas, he was not aware of Mohit Dargani’s complaint against him. He also maintained that there is no undue delay with regard to the case of Mohit Dargani.

Bruselas said that based on the facts presented to them, they have opted to get the side of the Senate on the matter.

He said there were two things that they could have done when the case was raffled to them: 1. issue a writ and direct that the person in custody be brought to court, or 2. if the court sees from the facts indicated that there is a need to address preliminary matters, they should ask the other party, in this case, the Senate, to comment.

“That is what we did, we issued a resolution asking the Senate to submit their comment,” Bruselas said during his interview before the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) on Tuesday, April 5.

“We are in the process of resolving that [petition]. Why the little bit of delay because first there have been changes brought by the reorganization of the Court of Appeals as new members are coming in and secondly, it was because of the lockdown that was still at alert level 3,” he also said.

ADVERTISEMENT

Thirdly, he said the Dargani siblings “were actually held by virtue of lawful authority, the Senate. It could have been different if there is no lawful authority.”

“We are not in delay because we are well within the time allowed by the rules for resolving cases,” he added.

RELATED STORIES

Senate panel recommends charges vs Michael Yang, Pharmally, PS-DBM execs for pandemic fund mess

Lacson cites ‘strong reservations’ that Duterte ‘betrayed public trust’ in Pharmally mess

KGA

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

For more news about the novel coronavirus click here.
What you need to know about Coronavirus.
For more information on COVID-19, call the DOH Hotline: (02) 86517800 local 1149/1150.

The Inquirer Foundation supports our healthcare frontliners and is still accepting cash donations to be deposited at Banco de Oro (BDO) current account #007960018860 or donate through PayMaya using this link.

Read Next
Don't miss out on the latest news and information.

Subscribe to INQUIRER PLUS to get access to The Philippine Daily Inquirer & other 70+ titles, share up to 5 gadgets, listen to the news, download as early as 4am & share articles on social media. Call 896 6000.

TAGS: administrative complaint, Court of Appeals, COVID-19, Mohit Dargani, Pharmally
For feedback, complaints, or inquiries, contact us.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and
acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.



© Copyright 1997-2022 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

We use cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. By continuing, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. To find out more, please click this link.