The controversial Rehabilitate, Operate, Transfer (ROT) case involving the Tagbilaran City Square which has become a judicial “hot potato†when one trial judge after another inhabited, finally fell into the lap of a magistrate who is believed “to have no love lost†with one of the respondents of the case.
Whether it was to the good fortune or whatever to Presiding Judge Teofilo Baluma of Regional Trial Court Branch I that he was the last arbiter of justice in a pool of four judges who inhabited from handling the case, remains to be seen while the conflicting parties are preparing for the legal showdown.
Baluma who as of now is the presiding judge of the case refused to inhibit even as he was called upon to do so by City Legal Officer Donie Piquero, counsel of respondent Citty Mayor Dan Neri Lim.
But Mayor Lim appeared confident of winning the ROT case even if Baluma were the third man in the legal ring. Judge Baluma and Lim tangled in the past on the issue of cases where Baluma was at the helm of the family court.
Judge Baluma accused Lim as instrumental in having him audited of his case load by the Supreme Court. The mayor, however, denied the accusation except saying that what he did was assist a litigant in a sexual abuse case who had to endure not only the horrors of the incident itself but of the incompetence of the court that tried him.
So confident that Lim dared Judge Baluma to accept the case even in the wake of the inhibition motion filed by his lawyer.
Earlier, Mayor Lim twitted Baluma in a biting letter citing the judge’s “uncharacteristic swiftness of your order and the unfounded and irresponsible allegations contained therein only the said motion given your manifest resentment therefore partiality against the undersigned and your incompetence to rule on the case on the basis of its meritâ€.
The Lim’s scathing letter was preceded with the motion for inhibition as filed by the mayor’s legal counsel.
In the same letter which answered an earlier communication by Judge Baluma containing his refusal to inhibit in the case, Mayor Lim also castigated the presiding judge for his repeated reference to the city executive as “top honchoâ€
Mayor Lim said describing him as top honcho betrayed the judge’s propensity for verbose orders that have no place in formal issuances of the court. He said he was no top honcho but a mere public servant who deserves to be treated civilly if not respectfully.
At the same time, Mayor Lim also took exception to the judge’s allegations regarding allowances received by RTC judges.
According to Mayor Lim, Judge Baluma made himself looked heroic as if he was deprived of the monthly honoraria while other magistrates are enjoying the same.
Mayor Lim said, records showed that Judge Baluma had been religiously receiving his representation allowance from the city government since 1997 until 2006.
In his own answer to Mayor Lim’s tirades, Judge Baluma made it clear that he was not ready to issue an inhibition order in the tricky case, without delving in matters that will protect the integrity of the judiciary.
On the issue of allowances courtesy of the city, Judge Baluma said he was one of the possible two out of the seven judges who was not receiving any honorarium since 2006. The judge said the five other RTC judges were willing recipients of honoraria from the city government.
According to the judge, these “recitals†were primordial to stress that he can assure the conflicting parties that he can dispose the case within the level of the law and available trends or jurisprudence not influenced by any peripheral issues for judges were placed in their posts and priveleged to wear the robe to apply the law even if the heavens fall. He said judges should rule issues not because their honoraria were delivered chamber to chamber by pawns of the city governance.
In parting, Judge Baluma, citing transparency, called on the parties involved to submit within 24 hours from receipt of the order of manifestation that they are submitting to the cold neutrality of an impartial judge, which the court will uphold and guarantee having no master but law, no guide but conscience to uphold the rule of law, waiving all other objections and contests mandatory and or directory to the court to try, hear and decide cases.
The controversial civil action for the issuance of the temporary restraining order (TRO) was triggered by the ROT scheme entered into by Mayor Lim with a consortium to develop the Agora also known as Tagbilaran City Square which had been languishing for 14 years as a white elephant.
The ROT contract was assailed by lawyers Victor de la Serna, Alexander Lim and Zotico Ochavillo as grossly disadvantageous to the city giving rise to the civil suit. - source: Sunday Post
Linkback:
https://tubagbohol.mikeligalig.com/index.php?topic=17469.0
