Justices, lawyer: Harassment, total falsehood
“Total falsehood” was how lawyer Pancho Villaraza dismissed accusations by Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV that he arranged a P50-million payoff to two Court of Appeals (CA) justices who stopped the suspension of Makati Mayor Jejomar Erwin “Junjun” Binay.
“We are not in any way involved in the case. I don’t even know and have not met Mayor Junjun Binay,” Villaraza told
The STAR in a text message. For the two CA sixth division associate justices – Francisco Acosta and Jose Reyes – Trillanes’ accusation was baseless and constituted “harassment that seek to threaten magistrates in our bounden duty to discharge justice based on fairness, impartiality and the rule of law.”
Reyes chairs the sixth division. The third member of the
division was Associate Justice Eduardo Peralta Jr.
The justices denied receiving money, favor or promise in the discharge of their duties and stressed that the allegation of the senator – supposedly based on “reliable sources” – would “undermine the integrity of the judiciary as an institution and weaken the people’s faith in our legal processes.”
“The judiciary must be insulated from partisan politics. We dispense justice based on the rule of law and established evidence, and will continue to do so,” the CA sixth division said in a statement.
Reyes said that in issuing the temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction on the Binay case, they were “acting as a collegiate body, after observing a meticulous, impartial and judicious evaluation of prevailing laws, jurisprudence and evidence presented by the parties.”
The Villaraza & Angangco (V&A) Law Office dared the senator to reveal his “reliable sources” and produce proof of his allegations against Villaraza.
“In the spirit of fairness and in accordance with due process, we challenge Sen. Trillanes to reveal who his ‘reliable sources’ are, and more importantly to produce proof to support his libelous statements,” V&A said in a statement issued through managing partner Bievenido Somera Jr.
The law firm believes that Trillanes “is being misled and dragged by adversaries of the firm into the private commercial dispute referred to in his resolution.”
It pointed out that Binay is not a client.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), for its part, said the Senate has no power to investigate the CA justices as Trillanes had proposed.
“They (Senate) must file it before the SC ( Supreme Court) if it’s a complaint against the justices. They must address such grievances to the SC, which has rightful jurisdiction to handle such complaint,” IBP national president Vicente Joyas said in a phone interview.
Joyas stressed that cases against members of the judiciary are confidential and hearing these at the Senate would violate the confidentiality rule.
He revealed that the IBP is set to look into the allegations against the CA justices in a hearing on April 22.
The IBP head said Trillanes and other accusers of the justices would be invited to the inquiry.
“If they have evidence, we will help them. But it should be hard evidence and not just hearsay. If there’s none, then they should stop this insinuation that will destroy the judiciary as an institution,” he added.
The Supreme Court, for its part, has remained mum on the controversy. Its spokesman, Theodore Te said the high court has not yet released a statement on the issue.