CA justice inhibits from Manila port case
An Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals has inhibited from hearing the case involving the Harbour Centre Port Terminal Inc. (HCPTI) in Manila.
Associate Justice Ramon Garcia granted the petition filed by businessman Reghis Romero II, who sought his inhibition because he is a fraternity brother of One Source President Cyrus Paul Valenzuela. One Source is the other party to the case.
Garcia said while the sole ground for asking his inhibition is insufficient, he will inhibit from the case to avoid suspicion of bias and prejudice.
“In the case at bench, petitioners call for the voluntary inhibition of the undersigned Justice on the sole ground that he is fraternity brother of the president of private respondent corporation. The same, however, is an insufficient ground for inhibition, it being well-established that a judge is not expected to automatically inhibit himself from acting in a case involving a member of his fraternity,” Garcia said.
“Be that as it may, considering petitioner’s implications that the undersigned Justice would not be able to decide the instant case fairly and impartially because of his alleged relationship with the president of private respondent corporation, petitioners’ urgent motion for inhibition must be granted in order to free this Court of the slightest suspicion of bias and prejudice,” the magistrate added.
Aside from Garcia, another justice is being asked to inhibit from the case by One Source.
In its motion, it sought the inhibition of Associate Justice Noel Tijam, whom it said has been partial towards Romero.
Valenzuela said they will bring the case to the Supreme Court if Justice Tijam refused to inhibit.
“The High Court is our last resort,” Valenzuela said following the filing of an an urgent motion with the Special Fifteenth Division last August 13 asking Tijam to inhibit from the case.
He said Tijam previously ruled in favor of Romero’s company R-II Builders Inc. in 2010 which was later reversed by the Supreme Court because of numerous errors.
That case involved a suit filed by R-II Builders against Home Guaranty Corp. (HGC) and the National Housing Authority (NHA).
The Court of Appeals, in a decision written by Tijam, ruled in favor of R-II Builders. HGC then went to the Supreme Court, which in 2011 reversed the appeals court’s decision, citing “error upon error” in its proceedings. The high court also said the appeals court “gravely erred” on the issue of jurisdiction.
Valenzuela said it was “too much of an uncomfortable coincidence” that Tijam was again a member of the division set to resolve another case filed by Romero.
