|
By William B. Depasupil, Reporter
AFTER a long court battle, the Supreme Court
finally resolved the leadership row in a P14-billion soldiers’
fund association that almost jeopardized the investments of some
230,000 retired and active military and police personnel.
This came after the High Court affirmed
Wednesday the validity of the election of the new board members
of the Air Materiel Wing Savings and Loan Association, Inc. (AMWSLAI)
held on January 18, 2008.
In a 12-page resolution, the High Court’s
Third Division through Associate Justice Consuelo Ynares-Santiago
denied “for lack of merit” the omnibus motion filed by the group
of retired Col. Luvin Manay and, upheld the legitimacy of the
election of retired Col. Ricardo Nolasco Jr. and seven others as
members of the association’s board of trustees.
“On a final note, it must be stated that the
continuing battle of which group should sit in the governing body of
the AMWSLAI has caused doubts and uncertainties in the minds of the
hundreds of thousands who have invested their life savings therein.
It affects not only the stability of this financial institution but
of the economy at large,” the Court said in its resolution, which
also tells the warring parties that “no further pleadings shall be
entertained.”
The eight directors, together with those elected
in 2006 now compose the 11-member board of trustees of the
foundation.
Forum shopping scored
In deciding the case, the High Court said that
it agrees “with petitioners [Nolasco camp’s claim] that the
correct remedy for the respondents to seek the annulment of the
appellate court’s TRO [temporary restraining order] is to file a
motion for reconsideration and, upon its denial, to file a petition
for certiorari and prohibition before this Court.”
It noted that the opposing group had improperly
elevated the case to the High Court. “We cannot take cognizance of
proceedings before the Court of Appeals unless they are brought
before us through the proper mode of review. The omnibus motion
cannot be a substitute for the remedy of a special civil action for
certiorari.” the High Court said.
The Court also pointed out that the Manay
camp’s “omnibus motion was filed without the payment of docket
fees,” which is an indispensable requirement before it can take
cognizance of a case or controversy.
It also said that Manay’s camp is guilty of
forum shopping. “It is clear that by filing the omnibus motion,
respondents seek to preempt the resolution of the very same issue
that is currently pending before the Court of Appeals. Forum
shopping is not only contumacious but also deplorable because it
adds to the congestion of the heavily burdened dockets of the
courts,” the High Court said.
|
