THE Supreme Court (SC) has given the regional trial court (RTC) in Quezon City the go-signal to hear and resolve the P5-million damage suit filed by a businessman against Sen. Antonio F. Trillanes IV for accusing him as “dummy” of former Vice President Jejomar C. Binay in the purchase of a 150-hectare property in Rosario, Batangas, which has been tagged as “Hacienda Binay.”
In a 22-page decision penned by Associate Justice Noel Tijam, the SC’s First Division junked the petition filed by Trillanes seeking the reversal of the resolutions issued by Judge Evangeline Castillo-Marigomen, presiding judge of the QC RTC Branch 1010, on May 19, 2015, and December 16, 2015.
The trial court, in the said resolutions, denied Trillanes’s motion to dismiss the civil suit filed by Antonio Tiu, who claimed ownership of the property through his company Sunchamp Real Estate Corp. (Sunchamp), and his motion for reconsideration.
The SC held that Trillanes cannot invoke parliamentary immunity to escape prosecution for damages over the statements he gave to the media in October 2014, accusing Tiu as a mere dummy of the former vice president.
In his complaint, Tiu insisted that he is a legitimate businessman engaged in various businesses in the agricultural sector and that he has substantial shareholdings in numerous corporations and companies
The complainant claimed that because of Trillanes’s claim his reputation was tarnished, which affected his businesses as shown by the steep drop in the stock prices of his publicly listed companies,
Tiu also vehemently denied being a dummy of Binay, saying that he has financial capacity to fund the development, operation and maintenance of the “Sunchamp Agri-Tourism Park.”
In seeking the dismissal of the civil suit, Trillanes asserted that Tiu was not able to prove his supposed ownership of the said estate. He pointed out that former Makati Vice Mayor Ernesto Mercado testified on how he helped the former vice president acquire and expand the property.
Trillanes further explained that his statements were protected by his constitutionally guaranteed rights to free speech and freedom of expression and of the press considering that these were made as part of an ongoing public debate of a matter of public concern Trillanes also insisted that his statements, having been made in the course of his duties as a senator, are covered by his parliamentary immunity under Article VI, Section II of the 1987 Constitution.
However, in an order dated May 19, 2015, the trial court denied Trillanes motion to dismiss the complaint, saying that the allegations raised in the complaint were sufficient to enable the court to issue judgment.