Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay. INQUIRER PHOTO/RAFFY LERMA
The Court of Appeals Sixth Division is set to hear on Monday afternoon the application for a writ of preliminary injunction filed by Makati City Mayor Junjun Binay against the preventive suspension imposed on him by the Ombudsman for alleged corruption.
The preliminary injunction would stay the suspension while the appellate court deliberates on the certiorari petition that Binay filed on March 12 contesting the validity of his suspension.
The court scheduled hearings on Binay’s plea on Monday and Tuesday, both at 2 p.m., with the Office of the Solicitor General representing the government, and a legal team led by lawyer Claro Certeza representing the mayor.
The appeals tribunal earlier consolidated with the suit Binay’s other petition filed on March 17 asking that Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima and Interior Secretary Mar Roxas, among others, be cited in contempt for supposedly disobeying its temporary restraining order (TRO).
Election lawyer Romulo Macalintal has joined others critical of the stand of Morales, De Lima and Roxas that the TRO was moot and not binding.
Macalintal said the three officials should “take a cue” from the March 24 TRO issued by the Supreme Court against the Commission on Elections (Comelec) and Smartmatic Corp. halting their P269-million contract for the maintenance and repair of the 81,000 precinct count optical scan machines to be used in the 2016 polls.
The lawyer noted that the Comelec awarded the contract to Smartmatic in February. A petition assailing the contract was filed the same month in the high court, which did not immediately issue a TRO but asked the parties to comment.
In the meantime, Comelec and Smartmatic officially started implementing the contract. However, after the Supreme Court issued the TRO, the Comelec and Smartmatic stopped implementing the contract.
“The same should be observed in the legal and political issues now prevailing in Makati City. While the vice mayor had already supposedly taken his oath of office by the time the Court of Appeals issued the TRO blocking the Ombudsman’s order, the vice mayor should yield to the Court of Appeals injunction and cease and desist from claiming or assuming the position of mayor of Makati,” Macalintal said.
On March 16, Binay secured a 60-day temporary restraining order on his suspension after the Ombudsman ordered him suspended for six months for his alleged role in the overprice of the Makati City Hall Building II.
The Ombudsman gave the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) five days to enforce the suspension.
A few hours before the court issued the TRO, the DILG said it had “enforced” the Ombudsman’s order by posting a copy of it at City Hall and then authorized the swearing in of Vice Mayor Romulo Peña as acting mayor.
Backed by a legal opinion from De Lima, the DILG said the TRO was moot and academic. The Ombudsman adopted a similar position, adding that its decisions may only be stopped by the Supreme Court.
On March 26, Morales filed a petition in the Supreme Court questioning the validity of the appeals court’s TRO and asked the high court to issue a TRO. Instead of granting Morales’ request, the high court ordered Binay and the Court of Appeals to file their comments not later than April 6.