CA Justice Bruselas refutes delay claim

MANILA — Detained Pharmally executive Mohit Dargani has filed an administrative complaint before the Supreme Court’s Judicial Integrity Board against a Court of Appeals justice who allegedly sat on his bid to be released from Senate custody.

But CA Associate Justice Apolinario Bruselas, Jr., presiding justice of the Special Fifth Division, insisted they were “well within the time” allowed by the rules to resolve the case.

In a 16-page complaint affidavit filed Tuesday, Dargani accused Bruselas of delaying action on his petition for habeas corpus, which questioned his detention since November 14, 2021 based on a contempt order and warrant of arrest issued by the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee.

The Senate ordered the arrest of the Darganis and a third Pharmally executive, Linconn Ong, for refusing to hand over documents crucial to the probe of billions worth of pandemic-related contracts.

Mohit and his sister Twinkle lodged the habeas corpus plea on November 19 and the case was raffled to Bruselas’ division.

In the meantime, Mohit and Ong were transferred to the Pasay City Jail on November 29 last year while Twinkle remained within Senate premises.

She was eventually released on humanitarian grounds due to her “deteriorating mental health condition” on January 11 this year, based on a Senate resolution.

• Senate releases Twinkle Dargani from custody on humanitarian considerations

In his complaint, Mohit claimed Bruselas violated canon 6 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct for the Philippine Judiciary which requires judges to perform their judicial duties “efficiently, fairly and with reasonable promptness” for supposedly not immediately acting on his case when habeas corpus petitions are among the cases to be prioritized for resolution under the internal rules of the CA.

It noted that the Darganis have filed 3 motions to resolve.

“[C]omplainant has been languishing at the Pasay City Jail for nearly five (5) months now, without having been given a day in court. No criminal prosecution has been filed in court against him yet, he remains incarcerated, with no certainty as to when he may regain his lost liberty,” the complaint said.

“Time and again, the Supreme Court consistently reminded the bench that delay in the disposition of cases is a major culprit in the erosion of public faith and confidence in the judicial system, as judges have the sworn duty to administer justice without undue delay,” it added.

The complaint was filed via email on the same morning Bruselas was interviewed by the Judicial and Bar Council, as part of his application for a Supreme Court associate justice post to be vacated by retiring Senior Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe.

Asked about the administrative case, Bruselas said he was “not aware” of it but detailed the steps his division did.

“When that case was filed with us, we issued a preliminary resolution. Because in a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, the court has a choice of whether or not to at once issue the writ and direct that the person in custody be brought by the custodians of the court, or, if the court sees from the facts indicated, that there’s a need for preliminary matters to be addressed, that’s what we did,” he told the JBC.

“We issued a resolution directing the preliminary matters to be addressed and asked the Senate sergeant at arms, etc… to submit their comment. They have done that. Now, your honor, the status is we are in the process of resolving that,” he added.

Bruselas explained that while there was a little bit of delay in resolving the issue, they still had time under the rules to settle the issue.

“Why the little bit of delay? Because there have been changes brought about by the reorganization of the Court of Appeals, your honor. And as we reorganized, new members come in, new members join the court. Secondly, your honor, it was also because the lockdown was still alert level 3,” he said.

“We did not issue at once the writ because the court felt that the matter being, I mean the petitioners were actually held by virtue of a local authority that is the Senate. It would have been different, if, prima facie, you would’ve seen that there is no local authority who’s directed that they be held in custody,” he added.

“We are not in delay because we are well within the time allowed by the Rules in resolving cases, your honor,” he continued.

The 2009 internal rules of the CA does not specifically mention how soon habeas corpus petitions should be resolved but under the Constitution, CA justices have 12 months to rule on a case.

Aside from Bruselas, 5 other CA justices and 1 Sandiganbayan justice are vying for the SC associate justice post.

They are CA justices Maria Elisa Diy, Ramon Cruz, Fernanda Lampas Peralta, Ronaldo Martin and Maria Filomena Singh as well as Sandiganbayan justice Geraldine Faith Econg.

RELATED VIDEO

Watch more in iWantv or TFC.tv