|
The three-member panel looking into the alleged bribery scandal in
the Court of Appeals (CA) has extended its probe to allow Camilo
Sabio, chair of the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG),
who is abroad on official mission, to explain his side on his
supposed involvement in the case when he is back.
The PCGG official is the elder brother of CA
Justice Jose Sabio, one of the key figures in the case that arose
from the controversy between the Manila Electric Company (Meralco)
and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) over control of
the power utility firm.
The GSIS had filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) a case questioning the use by Meralco of
proxy votes in its May 27 board election. The SEC issued a cease and
desist order against Meralco, but instead of complying, the electric
firm went to the CA to seek a temporary restraining order (TRO).
Eventually, the CA’s Eighth Division
promulgated a decision on July 23, stating that the SEC had no
jurisdiction over the case. The decision is the bone of contention
between the GSIS and Meralco, which have ramified into many complex
issues, including a supposed P10-million-bribe offer to Justice
Sabio by an “emissary” from the power company.
In his affidavit to the investigating panel,
Justice Sabio said his brother had called to tell him of the
“rightness” of the GSIS position in the case. Asked by the panel
if he had told off his brother about the “impropriety” of his
meddling in the case, Justice Sabio said he didn’t out of respect,
but begged its indulgence for the moral lapse.
The key personalities in the case, aside from
Sabio, are Justices Vicente Roxas, the ponente (writer) of the
controversial decision; Bienvenido Reyes, chair of the CA’s Eighth
Division that promulgated the ruling; Justice Apolinario Bruselas,
third member of the Eighth Division; and businessman Francis de
Borja, the supposed Meralco “emissary” who allegedly offered a
P10 million bribe to Sabio.
Based on newspaper accounts of the
investigation, Roxas did a lot of explaining on what appeared to be
“procedural lapses” in the handling of the case. On several
occasions, he was questioned on his “unusual interest” in the
case and on the “unusual haste” with which he promulgated the
decision voiding the SEC cease and desist order.
Retired Justice Flerida “Ruth” Romero, a
member of the probe panel, noted that Roxas had obviously preempted
the July 24 ruling of CA’s presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez on
which CA division, the Eighth or the Ninth, was authorized to
promulgate the decision when he issued the court ruling a day
earlier (on July 23), favoring Meralco. Vasquez’s ruling was for
the Ninth Division chaired by Sabio to have decided the case.
On another point, ex-Justice Jose Callejo, a
panel member, asked Roxas how a “transcript” was made of the
Eighth Division’s supposed deliberations when, according to
Justice Bruselas’ testimony, no stenographer was present to take
down notes.
Retired Justice Carolina Grino Aquino, the panel
chair, pounced on Roxas if he had made the minutes from memory.
Roxas replied he made the minutes as factual as possible.
Roxas had owned up mistakes, including breaching
the confidentiality of his decision on the case by showing a copy
before its promulgation to Justice Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal, member of
the Ninth Division. He claimed Vidal had asked to read it but she
flatly denied it, calling Roxas a “liar.” The issue drew Callejo
to comment that Roxas was not a paragon of efficiency as he thought
him to be.
Seemingly beleaguered by the panel’s withering
examination, Roxas asked that he be given a “fighting chance to
save” his reputation.
Initially, Roxas was on the offensive, hinting
of presiding Justice Vasquez’s “leaning” toward the GSIS
considering the employment of some relatives in the insurance firm.
It was a charge, according to CA sources, which was turned on its
head by Vasquez’s action of denying a petition by the GSIS for a
re-raffling of the case after it was assigned to Roxas.
De Borja, who claimed to have had a meeting with
Sabio (whom he called a long-time friend) to “touch base,” was
asked by ex-Justice Aquino about his seeming unusual interest in the
case. He replied it was to gather chismis (gossip). “I am appalled
at the way the GSIS is going after Meralco,” he said, betraying in
effect where his interest lies.
The investigating panel has a big job on its
hands in restoring integrity and decency to the second highest court
of the land. The case was saddled not only with improprieties but
also with the illegality of some acts, which require the imposition
of the sternest sanctions against the erring parties.
It should delve deeper into the bribery angle, a
key issue that has tarnished the CA’s image even while the truth
of it is yet to be proven.
agr0324@yahoo.com
|
