Court to decide Mayor Binay case without hearings
The Court of Appeals (CA) is set to rule on the petition filed by Makati City Mayor Junjun Binay questioning his suspension by the Ombudsman last June in connection with alleged overprice in the construction of the Makati Science High School Building.
In a two-page resolution dated Sept. 3 and released on Friday, the appellate court’s Special Ninth Division submitted the case for resolution without conducting a hearing because the parties did not submit memorandums summing up their arguments and positions in the case. The parties were therefore deemed to have waived their right to file a pleading.
The court recalled that in a resolution dated Aug. 11, the parties were directed to simultaneously file their respective memoranda within five days. The resolution said the parties that failed to submit a memorandum would be deemed to have waived their right to file pleadings.
“Accordingly, this case is deemed submitted for decision,” read the resolution written by Justice Melchor Sadang. The other division members, Justices Amy Lazaro-Javier and Rodil Zalameda, concurred.
The court also lifted its Aug. 5 order requiring the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) to manifest when Binay’s camp received its copy of the DILG comment. The court noted that Binay’s camp had yet to reply to the comment.
On Aug. 27, the OSG asked the court to give it 10 days to comply with the order.
DILG: Just doing our job
The DILG, in its comment, merely alleged that it should not have been impleaded because it was its ministerial duty on its part to serve the Ombudsman’s preventive suspension order on Binay.
Binay’s lawyer, Claro Certeza, welcomed the latest development as a positive sign the court may once again side with them, considering the similarity in circumstances to Binay’s first and second suspension orders.
“The application of the doctrine of condonation is undeniable. We hope the Special Ninth Division views this case the same way the Sixth Division did,” Certeza said.
In his petition, Binay again invoked the so-called condonation doctrine, saying the alleged illegal acts pertaining to the seven-phase high school building project were committed when he was not yet the city mayor.
The appellate court’s Sixth Division earlier issued a temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction stopping the Ombudsman from implementing a similar six-month suspension order on the mayor in connection with another alleged anomaly in the construction of the Makati City Hall Building II. The Ombudsman has elevated that case to the Supreme Court for review.
On July 23, Binay had asked the court to resolve his prayer for the issuance of a temporary restraining order and writ of preliminary injunction on his second suspension.—Jerome Aning
