Estrada lawyer wants Sandigan justices removed for ‘foul language’

One of former President Joseph Estrada’s lawyers has accused of partiality the magistrates hearing his unprecedented corruption trial and will file a motion today seeking their removal from the case.

Attorney Alan Paguia said the three justices of the Sandiganbayan special division used foul language in last Friday’s hearing that showed their "prejudgment" of the case.

Paguia was lectured last Friday by Justice Minita Nazario, the presiding magistrate, and Justice Teresita de Castro after they rejected his motion seeking the dismissal of the charges against Estrada.

He said the Supreme Court erred when it swore in President Arroyo after declaring the presidency vacant during the January 2001 uprising that toppled Estrada.

He claimed Estrada was ousted illegally and was, therefore, immune from suit because he was still president.

Nazario told Paguia they could not grant his motion because it effectively asked the anti-graft court to overturn a ruling of the country’s highest court, something which they called a "rank absurdity."

Paguia got piqued when Nazario bluntly rejected his request to put on record that the Supreme Court made a mistake in recognizing Mrs. Arroyo’s government.

"Ano kami, gago? Eh para ano pa ang mosyon mo? Eh di pagtatawanan naman kami noon. (What are we, stupid? What then is your motion for? They’re going to laugh at us)," Nazario said.

"It’s not because of whimsical refuse. We are prohibited by law, by the Constitution, by jurisprudence (to modify or reverse a Supreme Court ruling)… You are asking us to do directly what we cannot do indirectly."

De Castro told Paguia that it was not the judiciary’s job to chronicle events in the nation’s history. "That’s not a judicial function. That’s the work of the historian. The court cannot do that. No court will do that, list down findings of facts without making a ruling."

Paguia said Nazario’s language was unbecoming of a magistrate. "She used foul language. It’s very disrespectful. There is no more appearance of neutrality. They have shown their prejudgment," he said.

An apology, however, would suffice, Paguia said, but quickly expressed doubt he would get one. Ironically, he said he would "bring this issue to the Supreme Court." He did not elaborate.

Prosecutors allege Estrada took bribes from illegal gambling rackets, embezzled state funds and profits from insider trading and used the proceeds to buy mansions for himself and for his mistresses.

They accuse him of amassing more than P4 billion during his 31-month rule and stashing the proceeds in a secret bank account under the alias Jose Velarde.

Earlier last month, Estrada filed an impeachment complaint against eight Supreme Court justices, including Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. before the House of Representatives, accusing them of playing partisan politics to legalize his ouster.

Estrada said the magistrates violated a judicial rule banning court officers from joining partisan political rallies when Davide swore in then Vice President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo as his successor at the height of the 2001 uprising known as people power 2.

At the height of the uprising against Estrada, the military and the police declared they no longer recognized him as commander-in-chief after most of his Cabinet officials resigned.

As Estrada left the palace through the back door, the Supreme Court declared the presidency vacant and swore in Mrs. Arroyo to succeed him.

Mrs. Arroyo will complete serving out Estrada’s term by next year and has said she had no plans of contesting the May polls.