Case Digest (A.M. No. 08-8-11-CA)
Facts:
590 Phil. 8; A.M. No. 08-8-11-CA, October 15, 2008, Supreme Court En Banc, Per Curiam — Re: Letter of Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr. on CA-G.R. SP No. 103692 [Antonio Rosete, et al. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, et al.]. The Court issued a per curiam resolution denying several motions for reconsideration of its Decision of September 9, 2008, which had sanctioned several justices of the Court of Appeals (the Meralco‑GSIS controversy).The administrative proceeding began with the Court of Appeals en banc referring the propriety of actions of certain CA justices in CA‑G.R. SP No. 103692 to a Panel of Investigators. The Panel investigated alleged improprieties in the deliberation, drafting and promulgation of the CA decision in the Meralco‑GSIS case and filed its Report (dated September 4, 2008). The Supreme Court then issued its Decision on September 9, 2008, adopting the Panel’s findings and imposing administrative penalties on various CA justices.
Following that Decision, the following motions for reconsideration were filed and are the subject of this resolution: (a) Motion for Reconsideration dated September 24, 2008 by Justice Vicente Q. Roxas; (b) Motion for Reconsideration dated September 15, 2008 by Justice Jose L. Sabio, Jr.; (c) Motion for Reconsideration dated September 24, 2008 by Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr.; (d) a Plea for Compassion and Clemency dated September 22, 2008 by Justice Myrna Dimaranan Vidal (treated as a motion for reconsideration); and (e) Motion for Reconsideration dated September 26, 2008 by Mr. Francis de Borja. The Court entertained the motions, reviewed the Panel’s report and the record, and, after consideration, issued the present resolution denying all the motions with finality.
The Decision under review (Sept. 9, 2008) had, among other things, dismissed Justice Roxas from the service, suspended Justice Sabio for two months, censured or reprimanded Presiding Justice Vasquez, admonished Justice Vidal, and referred possible criminal and professional misconduct (including the alleged bribery attempt involving Mr. de Borja and possible misconduct by PCGG Chairman Camilo Sabio) to the Department of Justi...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Did Mr. Francis de Borja have standing to seek reconsideration of the Court’s administrative Decision and was the Court’s referral of criminal allegations to the DOJ an unlawful prejudgment?
- Should the Court grant the motions for reconsideration and set aside or reduce the penalties imposed on Justice Vicente Q. Roxas?
- Should the Court grant the motion for reconsideration and remove or reduce the penalty imposed on Justice Jose L. Sabio, Jr.?
- Should the Court grant the motion for reconsideration and remove the penalty imposed on Presiding Justice Conrado M. Vasquez, Jr.?
- Should the Court grant the plea for compassion and clemency and revoke ...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)