BAGUIO CITY, Philippines–The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday will hold oral arguments on the bid of Ombudsman Conchita to nullify the Court of Appeals (CA) order stopping the implementation of the six-month suspension order against Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay.
In a four-page advisory, the high court has raised 11 issues which will be tackled during the debate.
Among the issues to be tackled include:
* Did the appellate court undermine the “constitutionally guaranteed” independence of the Office of the Ombudsman when it handed down the 60-day temporary restraining order (TRO)?
* Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction when it issued the TRO, dated March 16, considering the constitutionally guaranteed independence of the Ombudsman and a prohibition, under Section 14 of the Ombudsman Act, on the issuance of any restraining or injunctive order by courts, other than the SC, on any decision or findings of the Ombudsman.
* Whether or not the Ombudsman, as an impeachable officer, can be subject of contempt proceedings before the CA.
* Whether or not the Ombudsman’s determination that a preventive suspension of a public servant in an administrative disciplinary case is “timely, proper and necessary,” a finding of fact, or of law, or both.
* Whether or not the above-described determination by the Ombudsman is conclusive on the courts, such that any contrary view from the courts will only “delay and interfere” with an ongoing investigation.
The Ombudsman’s preventive suspension order involves a pending administrative case against Binay, his father, Vice-President Jejomar Binay, and several others in connection with the allegedly overpriced P2.7 billion Makati City Hall Building 2.
READ: CA backs Binay, orders gov’t to respect TRO
In her petition before the high court, Carpio Morales said the appeals court Sixth Division committed a grave abuse of discretion when it issued the injunction stopping Binay’s suspension last March 16 and a resolution dated March 20 directing the Ombudsman to comment on Binay’s petition to cite her for contempt for defying the CA order.
Carpio Morales, who is a retired SC associate justice, said that allowing the appellate court to restrain it from performing its constitutionally-mandated duties would set a “dangerous precedent” and that the Ombudsman will suffer grave and irreparable injury.
READ: Ombudsman asks SC to nullify CA TRO on Binay suspension
Likewise, the Ombudsman argued that Binay’s continued access to documents and witnesses at the Makati City Hall compromises and endangers the integrity of the pending administrative cases against him. IDL
RELATED STORIES
SC sets oral argument on Binay suspension<
Suspension order part of ‘telenovela’ for 2016 elections, says Binay lawyer