|
CHAIRMAN
Camilo Sabio of the Presidential Commission on Good
Government (PCGG) on Tuesday told the Supreme Court
three-man investigating panel that a lawyer of the
President’s husband, Jose Miguel Arroyo, called him to
ask for help in connection with the suit filed by the
Manila Electric Co. (Meralco) against the Government
Service Insurance System (GSIS) and the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC) before the Court of Appeals.
Appearing before the Supreme Court three-man panel
investigating the alleged bribery and impropriety
surrounding the July 23 Meralco decision, Sabio said
lawyer Jesus Santos called him on May 30, 2008,
informing him that the Meralco case was filed with the
CA and was assigned to the Special Ninth Division where
his brother, Associate Justice Jose Sabio Jr. was the
acting chairman.
Santos,
according to Chairman Sabio, is a member of the GSIS
Board of Trustees and that they have been friends for a
long time.
When
asked by retired Associate Justice Romeo Callejo Sr., a
member of the panel, if Santos is also the same lawyer
representing Mike Arroyo in his several libel cases,
Sabio said yes.
Although, he was not directly told by Santos to talk to
his brother and to convince him to rule in favor of GSIS,
Chairman Sabio said he understood the call as a plea to
intercede in the Meralco case considering that his
brother was a member of the division.
During
their telephone conversation on May 30, while he was at
the Davao airport waiting for his flight
to Manila, Chairman Sabio admitted that Santos told him
that a draft temporary restraining order (TRO) had
already been prepared.
Sabio
told the panel that he readily agreed to help Santos on
behalf of the “underprivileged, disadvantaged and
long-suffering people.”
“The
GSIS here has taken up the cudgels for the
long-suffering consumers and the public and that I think
the right thing to do is to help the GSIS legitimately,”
Sabio said.
He said
that after his conversation with Santos, he called up
Justice Sabio and told him to help GSIS “if the legal
situation would permit it.”
The PCGG
chairman said his brother told him that he would have to
decide on the merits of the case according to his
conscience.
While he
acknowledged that his action has prompted the filing of
a disbarment complaint against him before the SC, Sabio
still insisted that there was nothing unethical or
illegal with what he did.
He
explained that as government officials, he and his
brother’s basic mandate “pursuant to the Constitution,
is to protect the poor, disadvantaged, the
under-privileged, the underdog and the oppressed in our
society.”
During
his cross-examination, lawyer Vitaliano Aguirre, counsel
for CA Eighth Division chairman Associate Justice
Bienvenido Reyes, cited several provisions of the Canon
of Judicial Ethics, Code of Professional Conduct and
Canon of Professional Ethics which may have been
violated by the PCGG chairman.
Sabio,
however, said the provisions do not apply owing to the
“peculiar circumstances” when he made the call.
He added
that as a government official representing the interest
of the people, he found nothing wrong, illegal or
unethical in his act of speaking on behalf of the
majority of the “suffering public.”
Sabio
also denied that his action was tantamount to lobbying
considering that he did not do it for any monetary
consideration and that he was just trying to convince
his brother to do the “right” thing.
Meanwhile, panel chairman Carolina Griño-Aquino reminded
Sabio of Canon 13 of the Code of Professional
Responsibility, which states that “a lawyer shall relay
upon the merits of his cause and refrain from any
impropriety which tends to influence, or gives the
appearance of influencing the court.”
Retired
Associate Justice Flerida Ruth Romeo, a member of the
panel, told Sabio that she “was bothered” by the latter
statement that there was nothing wrong about his action.
“You see
nothing illegal, unethical or improper…You don’t think
you’re obstructing justice…I’m bothered anyhow of your
position on what is illegal, unethical and improper…You
have departed from your usual conduct because of the
peculiar circumstances of the case,” Romero commented.
Sabio
was reprimanded by Callejo who asked him whether his
rank of Cabinet secretary gave him the right to
intervene with matters belonging to the CA.
“What
gives you the right to interfere with the proceedings of
the CA? So do you mean to say that any member of the
Cabinet can call on any member of the CA regarding a
court procedure?” Callejo added.
Callejo
then sarcastically asked Sabio why he concentrated on
his brother when he should also have called Justices
Vicente Roxas and Myrna Dimaranan-Vidal so that GSIS’s
side on the controversy will be more represented.
“I did
not, your honor, I do not think that it was my business
to call them,” Sabio added.
“You do
not see yourself acting illegally, unethically and
improperly? Santos called you not because of your
concern for the suffering public, but because you were
the brother of Justice Sabio,” Callejo asked.
Justice
Sabio tried to defend the actuation of his brother by
saying that Filipino culture allows brothers to talk,
but he was also admonished by the panel for tolerating
the improper acts of his brother.
Callejo
said Justice Sabio should have immediately recused after
learning that his brother has interest in the case.
“You
lecture to our judges, you lecture to your students, do
you think its proper?... Isn’t that dangerous to rely on
Filipino culture?” Callejo asked.
The
panel has wrapped up its investigation on Tuesday and
has until September 4 to submit its report and
recommendation to Chief Justice Reynato Puno. |
