Trillanes: I will expose Binay paid for TRO

By: Jerry E. Esplanada, Leila B. Salaverria - 9 years ago

Senator Antonio Trillanes IV and Vice President Jejomar Binay. INQUIRER FILE PHOTOS

Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV on Tuesday alleged that Vice President Jejomar Binay’s family had bought a crucial injunction from the Court of Appeals as he denounced the appellate court ruling that stopped the preventive suspension of Makati Mayor Junjun Binay.

“One of these days, we will expose them: who had fronted for them, who they had talked to, how much they paid. Eventually, we will bring that all out,” said Trillanes, who initiated the Senate investigation into corrupt practices in Makati which has been ruled by a succession of Binay family members for almost 30 years.

“That is proof that our justice system is corrupt,” Trillanes told reporters in a phone patch interview.

According to the senator, he had received “information” that the Binays had spent “big money” to secure the injunction.

No comment

The Supreme Court has begged off from commenting on the most recent allegations that court resolutions at the Court of Appeals (CA) were for sale, saying the high court does not comment on such statements.

The Coalition of Filipino Consumers recently claimed it had information from a CA justice that TROs there were “for sale” for a price tag of P5 million.

READ: Alleged corruption in CA Sereno’s call, says Palace

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno has many times vowed to continue the “painful but necessary” cleansing process within the judiciary.

Last September, the high court dismissed Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Gregory Ong for his “corrupt inclinations,” after he was accused of links with alleged pork scam mastermind Janet Lim-Napoles.

READ: Sandigan Justice Ong dismissed

Several trial court judges are also currently under investigation for alleged ties with a certain Ma’am Arlene, who is accused of fixing court cases for high-paying clients.

READ: 4 judges probed for ‘Ma’am Arlene’ links

In March, the high court also started releasing its rulings on administrative cases against judges and lawyers as part of the housecleaning campaign.

The Ombudsman ordered the preventive suspension of Mayor Binay while he was being investigated in connection with the alleged irregularities in the construction of the Makati City Hall Building II, the first issue tackled in the Senate blue ribbon subcommittee hearings.

Construction of the P2.28-billion building first began when Vice President Jejomar Binay was the mayor of Makati, and completed when his son took over the post.

But the younger Binay challenged the ruling before the appellate court, which ruled in his favor, stopping his suspension indefinitely.

Trillanes and Sen. Aquilino Pimentel III, the blue ribbon subcommittee chair, supported Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales’ move to challenge the Court of Appeals ruling before the Supreme Court.

“I’m hoping the Supreme Court will save the day for the self-respect and dignity and integrity of the justice system,” said Trillanes.

“Since the Ombudsman feels that the preliminary injunction was granted with grave abuse of discretion, the Ombudsman should have this immediately reviewed by the Supreme Court and ask for a TRO (temporary restraining order),” said Pimentel, adding that the appellate court TRO should be heeded in the meantime.

Palace frustration

Malacañang on Tuesday also expressed its frustration with the country’s justice system.

According to presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, the Maguindanao massacre and the plunder case involving former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo were among the “most frustrating cases” that President Aquino wants to see resolved before his term ends next year.

“We’d like to see the cases resolved. But again, we have no control. That’s a limitation of a tripartite form of government that we have no control over the judiciary,” he said.

Lacierda said the 2009 Maguindanao massacre in which 56 people, including 34 local journalists, were ruthlessly killed, allegedly by members of the Ampatuan political clan, was “one of the cases that we would like to see resolved in our administration.”

He noted the case “has been ongoing for several years. A number of accused persons have been arraigned, but a number, as well, are still in hiding or have not been arraigned.”

READ: Sajid Islam Ampatuan granted bail

Arroyo cases

At the same time, Lacierda said “lest we’ll be accused of saying that we are politicizing it, we have no updates on the cases of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.”

Arroyo has been detained on hospital arrest at Veterans Memorial Medical Center over a plunder case involving the alleged misuse of P366 million Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office funds from 2008 to 2010. She is also facing an election offense case filed by the Commission on Elections.

Lacierda disputed Arroyo family members’ claim that the cases were part of the administration’s “political persecution” of the former president, now a Pampanga legislator.

“I understand where it is coming from. But the bare fact is it is beyond our control. It’s within the discretion of the courts to decide on the fate of the accused,” said Lacierda.

“It is based on our discretion to file cases against an accused, whether it’s as high as a former President or as low as a clerk. However, it’s not within our province to decide the fate of an accused. The fate is decided by a judge or justices,” he said.

READ: Palace accepts dismissal of graft case vs Arroyo

Why the challenge?

Pimentel wondered why the Ombudsman’s preventive suspension order had to be challenged by the Makati mayor at all, noting that it was not a penalty, but the “self-defense [action] of the state.”

“Why the vehement resistance [to the preventive suspension order]?” he said.

Pimentel explained that an official’s temporary suspension is implemented to prevent the possibility of him or her tampering with the evidence. He added that the official, once cleared of misconduct would be given back wages.

But he said the Office of the Ombudsman should also review its rules. He said its charter stated that its findings and decisions are appealable to the Supreme Court, but it drafted new rules allowing its decisions to be challenged before the CA. With a report from Tarra Quismundo