|
THE
Supreme Court (SC) three-man panel has ordered the
Government Service Insurance System (GSIS) to produce
the employment records, including the salaries, perks
and privileges being enjoyed by two daughters and other
relatives of Court of Appeals Presiding Justice Conrado
Vasquez who are working in the state pension fund.
At the continuation of the hearing on
the controversial July 23 Meralco ruling, the panel, led
by retired Associate Justice Carolina Griño-Aquino, said
the records are relevant to the ongoing investigation
into alleged improprieties committed by CA justices
involved in the Meralco case.
The panel issued the order despite
strong objection by Vasquez that the records are
irrelevant to the investigation and that the request
made by lawyer Vitaliano Aguirre II, counsel of
Associate Justice Bienvenido Reyes, was intended to
besmirch his integrity and that of his family.
Aquirre’s petition was the offshoot of
an earlier attempt by Associate Justice Vicente Roxas,
the ponente of the Meralco ruling, to cast doubts on
the impartiality of Vasquez. Roxas’s claim was earlier
stricken off by the panel, for being hearsay.
“Justice Reyes’s affidavit did not
contain statements about my relatives….Meralco could be
the one interested in this to bring us down,” Vasquez
said.
Vasquez even accused
Meralco of using media people to tarnish his reputation
and that of CA Justice Jose Sabio, who claimed to have
been offered P10 million to inhibit himself from the
case.
Sabio, Vasquez, Reyes along Roxas,
Associate Justices Apolinario Bruselas, Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal,
Martin Villarama, Edgardo Cruz and businessman Francis
Roa-De Borja are being investigated for the alleged
bribery attempt and irregularities surrounding the
Meralco decision.
Aguirre told the panel that the
employment of Vasquez’s relatives in GSIS are very
relevant to the case, considering the latter’s failure
to immediately resolve the issue of whether the Eight
Division or the Special Ninth Division should decide on
the Meralco petition.
Aguirre also noted Vasquez’s issuance of
his opinion stating that it’s the Special Ninth Division
that should decide the case, a day after the Meralco
ruling came out—and despite admission as of July 21 that
he has no authority to rule on the matter.
“These [records] are relevant because
the action of a certain person can be governed by
certain interests. Rest assured PJ Vasquez that we are
not under the employ of anybody. I’m just here as
counsel of Justice Reyes,” Aguirre said.
In justifying its order, the panel said
information about the employment records of Vasquez’s
relatives in the GSIS “could shed light” on the alleged
improprieties committed by the CA justices.
“It’s up to the panel to separate the
chaff from the grain. We would like to find out any
inefficiency or defect in the procedures which would
bring about reforms in the manner of disposition of
cases,” the panel said.
The panel tasked GSIS Senior Vice
President for Administration Arnaldo Cuasay to submit to
the panel the records sought.
Aguirre claimed that Vasquez’s
daughters Maria Ruth and Maria Agnes Vasquez are under
the employ of the GSIS department manager at the GSIS’
Corporate Secretary’s Office and dentist, respectively.
Also, Vasquez’s sister, Leonora “Lenny”
Vasquez-de Jesus, former Presidential Management Staff
chief under the Estrada administration, is said to be a
GSIS consultant receiving a monthly salary of P200,000
Her daughter, Louisa Hernandez, who
works as vice president for treasury, is reportedly
receiving a monthly salary of P127,000.
This developed as retired Associate
Justice Romeo Callejo Sr. castigated GSIS chief legal
officer Estrella Elamparo for “attacking the integrity”
of the Judiciary by filing a motion of inhibition
without citing concrete reasons.
Callejo was referring to the GSIS’s
motion seeking Roxas’s inhibition based on information
coming from an unidentified woman that the justice was
meeting with Meralco lawyers; unverified information
that he has pending administrative cases; and allegation
that Roxas instructed that the records of the case be
brought to his office.
“Imagine a person called you and told
you so and so and you swallowed it hook, line and
sinker….It came from someone you don’t even know. You
should be careful because you’re attacking the integrity
of the Judiciary…. Next time before you file a motion,
it should be based on facts and say whether it came from
unidentified person or not. You should do it with
candidness, with specificity. Remember you’re a member
of the Judiciary and as an officer of the court, you
have a duty to protect the legal profession,” Callejo
said.
De Borja also took the witness stand
yesterday and was cross-examined by Sabio on his
background.
Sabio initially tried to discredit De
Borja by portraying the latter as a “commissioner”
(kickback expert), as stated by several of his friends.
But De Borja tried to get even by
telling that panel that some people have approached him
telling him that Sabio is “dirty.”
De Borja also denied that the P300,000
gave Sabio for helping them in land trouble was a bribe,
adding that it was given to the justice as his
commission for rendering legal advice to the family in
the sale of a property in Cagayan de Oro.
De Borja said Sabio, then a lower court
judge, readily accepted the money.
De Borja also clarified to the panel
that Meralco president Manolo Lopez, whom he admitted to
being a close friend, never persuaded him to meet or
talk with Sabio regarding the Meralco case.
“He (Lopez) was silent on the matter
even though I told him that I knew Justice Sabio,” De
Borja added.
Sabio tried to deny his relationship
with De Borja by stating that never invited the
businessman to his house, an allegation De Borja
countered by saying “but you have been to my house.”
Sabio has claimed that De Borja
attempted to bribe him to inhibit himself from the case,
which was denied by the latter. --J.
San Juan |
