Supreme Court hands off on raps vs judge in Lozada case

MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) has distanced itself from an allegation that Manila Judge Jorge Emmanuel Lorredo violated legal ethics in his reported actions involving a perjury case filed by former presidential chief of staff Mike Defensor against national broadband network deal whistleblower Rodolfo Lozada Jr.

SC spokesman lawyer Jose Midas Marquez said the High Court cannot rule on petitions and issues related to the perjury case until they are brought to the tribunal – especially since the case is still pending with the lower court.

“We will leave it to the parties. It’s difficult for the Court to act without being asked to do so. We don’t want to preempt any action,” he told reporters in an interview.

Marquez stressed that decisions and actions made by Lorredo should be “within his sound discretion.”

Marquez defended Lorredo only in as far as his move to mediate in the conflicting parties was concerned: “There are some cases where the judge would try to convince the parties to just settle. That’s part of the duty of a judge. But that will also depend on how they say it.”

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez has asked the High Court to investigate Lorredo, who was quoted in a TV interview saying the perjury case against Lozada could be a prelude to declaration of martial law by President Arroyo.

Gonzalez also criticized the MTC judge for his supposed bias for Lozada after urging Defensor to withdraw his complaint and saying that the case could even result in the arrest of the President.

Lorredo, in the interview, alleged that hands of the Palace were behind efforts to convince him to inhibit from the perjury case.

In the interview last Wednesday, the judge claimed that an alleged emissary from Malacañang talked to him about the case.

Saying Lorredo may have “hallucinations,” Gonzalez believes the judge may be “riding” on the publicity of the case because he reportedly eyes a seat in Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.

Gonzalez also said Lorredo may be “eager for a settlement either because he is scared to try the case, or it is his subtle way of telling Defensor that pursuing the case in his sala may not be favorable to the former secretary. If this judge entertains doubts about the case, perhaps he should inhibit himself and be at peace, and watch the case unfold from the sidelines.”

Lorredo, however, refused to inhibit himself from the case and said he will not reply to Gonzalez’s allegations because “I have breeding.”

On the other hand, Deputy Presidential Spokesperson Lorelei Fajardo said Lorredo “could always file charges against the person… asking him to inhibit.” She also said the Palace has no interest in the case, and advised Lorredo to name names rather than make allegations unsupported by evidence. – With Marvin Sy