CA junks Junjun Binay contempt case vs Roxas, Ombudsman et al

The Court of Appeals’ Former Sixth Division has dismissed the contempt case filed by former Makati City Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay Jr. against Liberal Party (LP) presidential candidate Manuel “Mar” Roxas II, Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, LP senatorial candidate and former Justice Secretary Leila De Lima and several others.

In the 48-page decision made public Tuesday written by Associate Justice Jose C. Reyes Jr, the appeals court said the petition filed by the younger Binay “lacks merit.”

Binay, last year asked the Court of Appeals to cite in contempt Roxas and several others for defying the temporary restraining order issued against the implementation of the first suspension order issued by the Ombudsman against him.

READ: Junjun Binay asks CA to cite Roxas et al in contempt for defying TRO

The young Binay was suspended by the Office of the Ombudsman for his alleged involvement in the overpriced Makati Parking Building.

Aside from Roxas, De Lima and Carpio-Morales, he also asked the appeals court to cite in contempt Renato Brion, DILG-NCR Director; Carmelo Valmoria, Director of the Philippine National Police-National Capital Region Police Office (PNP-NCRPO); Henry Ranola, Director of the Southern Police District; Senior Superintendent Elmer Jamias and Makati Vice Mayor Romulo “Kid” Peña.

“In the face of the persistent and wanton refusal of Respondents to honor and comply with the lawful order of this Honorable Court, there is therefore an urgent need to cite Respondents for indirect contempt and immediately mete out the appropriate punishment on them until they shall have complied with the TRO,” the petition read.

Binay said the continued refusal to obey the restraining order “is a clear defiance of this Honorable Court’s authority and dignity and tends to bring the administration of justice into disrespect.”

READ: CA orders Ombudsman, de Lima, Roxas et al to answer Binay contempt case

But the appeals court, in its ruling said “this court holds that respondents are not liable for indirect contempt.”

The appeals court said Roxas, Brion, DILG and the police officers are merely performing their duty in implementing the order by the Office of the Ombudsman.

“Apparently, the DILG’s implementation of the Joint Order was in the performance of its ministerial duty. A ministerial duty is one which an officer or tribunal performs in a given state of facts, in a prescribed manner, in obedience to the mandate of a legal authority, without regard to or the exercise of his own judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done,” the appeals court said.

On Peña’s refusal to follow the restraining order issued by the appeals court in favor of Binay until instructed otherwise is not contemptuous, the appeals court said.

“A conduct, to be contumacious, implies willfulness, bad faith or with deliberate intent to cause injustice which is not the case here,” the appeals court explained.

On Ombudsman Morales, the appeals court said the manifestation she submitted in court regarding the Binay case “merely reflects her legal opinion, contains neither offensive nor derogatory language and thus, not contumacious.”

“The Supreme Court held that mere expressions of opinion and statements of legal arguments that did not pose a clear and present danger to the administration of justice is not contemptuous,” the appeals court said.

With regards to De Lima’s legal opinion regarding Binay’s suspension is not “contumacious.”

READ: De Lima: ‘Why cite us in contempt of court’

The appeals court said De Lima was merely performing her duties as head of the Department of Justice (DOJ) when she rendered the legal opinion.

“A reading of the legal opinion reveals that it was not so worded as to offend this Honorable Court. On the contrary, it was couched in a courteous language. Besides, the legal opinion made by respondent De Lima is merely persuasive and not controlling,” the appeals court said.

The decision was concurred in by Associate Justices Francisco P. Acosta and Eduardo B. Peralta Jr. CDG