MANILA, Philippines — Calling the indirect contempt case “frivolous,” human rights group Karapatan has asked the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court to dismiss the case filed by Atty. Ferdinand Topacio of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC)
The indirect contempt case was filed by Topacio against Karapatan Secretary General Cristina Palabay, former Sen. Leila de Lima and her legal counsels Filibon Tacardon and Dino de Leon as well as Rep. Edcel Lagman, Sen. Risa Hontiveros, and Bayan Secretary General Renato Reyes for their pronouncements following the denial of de Lima’s petition for bail.
Topacion, in his indirect contempt case, said the media statements made by de Lima and the others violate the “sub judice” rule that prohibits comments and disclosures about judicial proceedings in order to avoid prejudging the issue, influencing the court, or obstructing the administration of justice.
“Specifically assailed in this Petition are the contemptuous conduct of respondents in making public comments regarding the case of Atty. Leila de Lima which tends to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice,” read the petition.
The statements, he said, “clearly tend to bring the court into disrepute or disrespect simply because a ruling was made contrary to what they want.”
But Palabay, in her motion, said the case lacks merit.
First, she said Topacio has no legal standing to file the case because he is not a party to the drug case against de Lima, and neither are the seven names included in his complaint.
Quoting a Supreme Court ruling, Palabay’s motion to dismiss said a non-litigant may be cited in contempt if he or she conspired with the parties to violate a court order.
In this case, the motion said no evidence was presented showing such a conspiracy existed.
The motion further stated that Topacio failed to provide evidence that the media statements of the seven individuals were “extremely serious.”
“Herein petitioner showed no proof that such alleged utterance of herein Respondent will harm the administration of Justice,” the motion stated, adding that the case “is obviously filed to vex the respondents and stifle their rights to free speech and expression.”
De Lima has one more drug case undergoing trial before the Muntinlupa Court. It was recently re-raffled to another court after two judges inhibited from the case.
RELATED STORIES
VACC lawyer seeks indirect contempt ruling for De Lima, Hontiveros and Lagman
Muntinlupa judge inhibits from de Lima’s third drug case