CEBU, Philippines - The camp of suspended Governor Gwendolyn Garcia stressed that the filing of the motion for the inhibition of Court of Appeals Justice Vicente Veloso is based on strong grounds and not just on impulse.
In a phone interview with The FREEMAN yesterday, Atty. Tranquil Salvador III, Garcia’s lead counsel, defended their petition to inhibit Veloso from their case.
This, following the statement of the spokesperson of the Liberal Party in Cebu, Atty. Democrito Barcenas, who said that their party is being dragged as basis to inhibit Veloso.
Garcia’s camp filed a motion for inhibition last Friday stating numerous grounds including the concern on the delay of the resolution for the TRO when in fact a TRO was issued immediately to a candidate from the Liberal Party who filed for one from the CA.
“The motion to inhibit is not something a lawyer just files because he feels like filing it,†said Salvador, who added that apart from the belief that the delay of the resolution for a Temporary Restraining Order is ‘tainted with political bias’, they have also stated two strong grounds to support a motion to inhibit.
Primarily, Salvador said that Veloso’s various, sweeping statements during the hearing on the application for a TRO ‘demonstrated undue bias, prejudice and partiality,’ specifically upon mentioning the irreparable injury on the side of the government if the penalty of six months would be cut down to three if a TRO is approved.
Garcia’s camp stressed in the motion that even before the hearing was over, Veloso made his judgment on the case even having added that public office is the same with ordinary employment, reason that there is no irreparable injury for Garcia since she would be paid back wages if and when the suspension would be found illegal.
Also, Garcia’s counsel considered Veloso’s comment saying the justice made it appear that their application for a TRO was not to protect the mandate of the people in electing her as Governor but only for her to be able to physically occupy the Governor’s office.
Salvador pointed out that Veloso also considered the actions taken by the suspended governor to protect her office was ‘noise’ even before receipt of evidences of the case.
More importantly, Salvador said that the ‘inordinate delay’ in the resolution of the application for a TRO/Status Quo Ante Order is another strong ground to ask for Veloso’s inhibition.
Garcia’s camp filed the instant petition for review with application for issuance of TRO and Write of Preliminary Injunction last December 20 but Salvador pointed out that a hearing was held 21 days after.
Salvador said that since no resolution was released 29 days after, Garcia’s camp filed for a very urgent motion reiterating the issuance of a TRO but again it was not resolved.
“Last January 22, Veloso issued a resolution but merely repeated what he said last Jan.10,†Salvador pointed out.
Salvador added that what took them by surprise is that despite the delay, their recent filing of a motion for time to reply on the preliminary injunction was answered very quickly and was taken as ‘an abandonment for a TRO’ which the camp had denied since last Friday.
Reports came out last Friday afternoon, stating that the suspended Governor have abandoned their plea for a TRO and was seeking the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction.
In a text to The FREEMAN last Friday evening, Atty Christina Garcia-Frasco denied the said abandonment. “For indeed, how could we possibly file a reply on the TRO when the TRO had already been submitted for resolution? To say that we have abandoned our petition for TRO because we seek to file a reply on the injunction is illogical, unjust, and unfair.â€
“This quick turnaround only adds to our grounds and confirms all our fears,†said Salvador.
But Salvador said that despite the recent spin of events on the TRO, they are considering it as a blessing since they now know what to do next. —/MIT (FREEMAN)