Binay camp warns Roxas
Makati Mayor Junjun Binay talks to his supporters in front of the Makati City Hall in this file photo taken on Jan. 27. The camp of Vice President Jejomar Binay, the mayor’s father, warned Thursday, March 12, that a “misencounter” might ensue should the Department of the Interior and Local Government rush the implementation of the preventive suspension order against the embattled mayor. NIÑO JESUS ORBETA / INQUIRER FILE PHOTO
MANILA, Philippines–The camp of Vice President Jejomar Binay on Thursday warned that a “misencounter” might ensue should the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) rush the implementation of the preventive suspension order against embattled Makati City Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr.
The misencounter was in apparent reference to the clashes in Mamasapano, Maguindanao province, on Jan. 25 between police commandos that took down Malaysian terrorist Zulkifli bin Hir, alias “Marwan,” and Moro rebels. The clashes resulted in the death of 44 commandos, 18 members of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) and five civilians.
The MILF, which has signed a peace deal with the government, called the clashes a misencounter because it was not informed that armed government forces were entering its territory, a violation of its ceasefire agreement with the government.
Rico Quicho, the political spokesman and lawyer of the Binays, said the Binay camp hoped Interior Secretary Mar Roxas would not rush the implementation of the six-month suspension order that the Office of the Ombudsman issued in connection with irregularities in the construction of the Makati City Hall Building II.
“We believe that justice will prevail and we hope that Secretary Roxas will not rush the suspension’s implementation as it may result in a misencounter,” Quicho said on TV5.
Article continues after this advertisementContacted by phone, Quicho said what he meant was that there might be “confusion” if the DILG failed to coordinate with the Ombudsman and the Court of Appeals (CA).
Article continues after this advertisementQuicho said the Binay camp was still awaiting word from the appeals court on Mayor Binay’s petition for certiorari seeking to stop the preventive suspension order.
He said that the camp wanted the DILG to respect the process and to await the result of Mayor Binay’s appeal, which included a temporary restraining order on the suspension order.
Quicho said while the Binay camp was waiting the CA decision, the mayor would continue serving the people of Makati.
Mayor not above law
Roxas said the mayor was not above the law and said his department would surely enforce the six-month suspension of the son of his political rival.
He said the DILG could serve anytime the Ombudsman’s order suspending Binay and 21 other Makati city officials while they were being investigated for alleged irregularities in the bidding and award of the Makati car park building.
Included in the Ombudsman’s investigation is former Makati Mayor and now Vice President Binay, who narrowly beat Roxas in the 2010 national elections.
The two are expected to tussle again in the 2016 elections, this time for the presidency.
“Mayor Binay is in a difficult situation because the law is against him but I repeat, the law is the law and we are all covered by the law,” Roxas said in a statement.
“I can only advise Mayor Binay to use the time to prepare his defense,” he said.
Roxas pointed out that it was the Ombudsman who decided to suspend the mayor and that the DILG had to enforce the order.
“What is most important to me is the continued, regular and uninterrupted service to residents of Makati, so I will assure this,” Roxas said.
Procedural
The Liberal Party (LP) said the suspension of the mayor was a procedural matter.
In a statement, Quezon City Rep. Kit Belmonte, a leading LP member, said the camp of Mayor Binay may question the suspension “but at the end of the day, preventive suspension is ministerial since it prevents an official like him from influencing the inquiry or secreting away official documents material to the investigation.”
Belmonte dismissed allegations politics was behind the suspension, saying that scores of other officials were suspended after criminal complaints were lodged against them for preliminary investigation by the Office of the Ombudsman.
Asked what would happen if the DILG would enforce the suspension order, Quicho said that he hoped this would not happen and that the DILG respect the right of Mayor Binay to appeal in the CA.
Petition in CA
In a petition for certiorari filed by his lawyers Claro Certeza and Ma. Patricia Alvarez in the appellate court, the mayor accused Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales of committing grave abuse of discretion in ordering his preventive suspension.
The Ombudsman’s order should be nullified and set aside “for being violative of established law and jurisprudence,” Binay said, calling his suspension “illegal and unfounded.”
Binay said his suspension “will deprive the Makati City electorate of the services of the person they have conscientiously chosen and vote into office.”
The mayor said all his actions on the project were “aboveboard and compliant with applicable laws and rules.”
The case also listed the DILG as respondent.
No hand by Roxas
The Office of the Ombudsman brushed aside insinuations that the unseen hand of Roxas was behind the order to suspend the Makati mayor.
Assistant Ombudsman Asryman Rafanan said there was no truth to allegations of a connection between Roxas and members of the special panel investigating the Binays and City Hall officials over the allegedly overpriced Makati City Hall Building II.
“The office vouches for the competence, integrity and professionalism of the investigators who came from different offices of the Ombudsman,” he said at a press conference.
Rafanan challenged the Binay camp to prove the allegation. “They have all the remedies if they really have proof of this so-called connection.”
He also defended his office against criticisms that it had acted far too quickly in issuing the suspension order against Binay compared with other cases that would take years.
8-month probe
“The complaints against Binay et al. were filed as early as July 2014. A period of eight months is a reasonable time [to find cause for a preliminary investigation, and to suspend officials preventively]… I cannot think of any undue haste on the part of the Ombudsman,” Rafanan said.
He said the speed with which the Ombudsman could take action in any proceeding would depend on the complexity of the case, the nature of the offense, and the number of respondents.
Rafanan noted that these were the same factors that led to the preventive suspension imposed on former national police chief Alan Purisima before he resigned his post.
Binay, whose preventive suspension stems from administrative cases, including grave misconduct and serious dishonesty, has defied the order, refusing to leave the premises of City Hall, where his supporters have gathered.
In such case, Rafanan said Roxas, through the DILG, may use the powers available to him to “execute by all means” the preventive suspension order.
But he noted that the DILG still had five days to comply with the Ombudsman order.
In the event that it fails to do so, the Ombudsman may ask “other law enforcement agencies” to come in, or alternatively, a person may file for contempt against Binay and the other respondents in a proper court, Rafanan said.
He also asked the mayor and his followers to abide by the rule of law.
Mayor’s order not legal
Senate Majority Leader Alan Peter Cayetano said the question now was whether Binay could just advise the city government because he could not issue any orders anyway as he has been suspended.
“He will remain in City Hall but none of his orders are legal. So all he can do is give advice to city hall,” Cayetano told reporters.
But this was his advice to Mayor Binay and his sibling politicians—part of the oath that their father took was to uphold the Constitution and laws of the land, which included following and respecting rulings if they were suspended in office.
While Cayetano said he respected the mayor’s decision to go to the CA, he made clear that the latter had no choice but to step down if no TRO was granted.
Go on vacation
“If he has nothing to hide, he should go on vacation,” Cayetano also said.
But he said his suspicion was that it was hard for Mayor Binay to leave his position because some things he had kept hidden might be revealed.
For his part, Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV twitted Mayor Binay for projecting an image that he was being persecuted.
“They have been lording it over Makati all this time and they have been abusing the trust and mandate that Makati residents gave them,” Trillanes said in a statement. “They did some hanky panky and they were unmasked. So, they must face justice.”
Five phases
In his petition in the CA, Binay said the Makati City Hall Building II involved five construction phases, the first two of which were undertaken before he became mayor in 2010.
“With respect [to] Phases III to V, which transpired during [my] first term (2010-13), [I am] being held administratively accountable by respondent Office of the Ombudsman despite the clear fact that [my] reelection for a second term (2013-16) rendered the case against [me] moot and academic,” the mayor said.
While some of the acts attributed to him were allegedly implemented during his second term as mayor, the same related to transactions (Phases III to V) concluded during his first term of office “and therefore effectively condoned [my] administrative liability by [my] reelection,” he added.
The mayor belittled the complaint filed against him, saying the pieces of evidence “bear out that there is none showing that [I] participated in any purported irregularities.”
General accusations
He accused the Ombudsman of lumping him with other respondents and filing general accusations in a “hit or miss” fashion, relying on a “conspiracy” among all of them. He added that this could not be presumed from his mere signature on the disbursement vouchers and on the award and purchase/contract.
Binay cited a 1995 case, Sabianiao v. Court of Appeals, wherein the Supreme Court explained that a mere signature of approval appearing on a voucher was not enough to sustain a finding of conspiracy among public officials and employees.
According to Binay, conspiracy “cannot be presumed” and evidence of intentional participation “is indispensable.”
RELATED STORIES
Mayor Junjun Binay ordered suspended for six months
