MANILA, Philippines—The Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and the Monetary Board (MB) has asked three Court of Appeals justices hearing the case of the Banco Filipino Savings and Mortage Bank to inhibit themselves from the case.
The BSP and the MB, represented by Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza and private counsel Simeon Marcelo, claimed they have begun to doubt the impartiality of Justices Vicente Veloso, Normandie Pizarro and Agnes Reyes-Carpio of the appellate court’s Former Special 14th Division.
The BSP and MB, both respondents in the Banco Filipino case, questioned the division’s Jan. 27 decision, which declared illegal the government’s closure of Banco Filipino for being insolvent and instructed the central bank to extend a P25-billion financial assistance to the bank.
“[We] started to entertain some doubts as to whether [we] can still be assured of a neutral and impartial tribunal,” the BSP and MB said in their 14-page motion for inhibition.
According to the respondents, two of the division’s original members, Justices Marlene Gonzales-Sison and Mariflor Punzalan-Castillo, who had sided with the BSP and MB in earlier pleadings, inhibited themselves, citing “personal reasons,” a week before before the decision came out.
The BSP and MB said it took a few days before Pizarro and Veloso were chosen to replace Sison and Castillo via a special raffle, so the division “would only have at most four working days” including the day of promulgation to decide the case, the the BSP and MB said.
“The manner in which the assailed Decision was arrived at and promulgated—from the surprising inhibition of its previous members for personal reasons, to the designation of special members of the division, to the appreciation of the same evidence adduced by the parties herein— has led respondents BSP-MB to doubt the Honorable Justices’ ability to continue hearing the instant case free from bias, prejudice and partiality,” the respondents said.
The BSP and MB wanted Carpio, who wrote the decision, to inhibit from the case for the reason that she contradicted her previous ruling favoring the government that the Banco Filipino was guilty of forum-shopping.
“In the present case, the same evidence which at the onset, was disregarded by Justice Reyes-Carpio, as insufficient to overthrow the presumption that the official duty has been regularly performed were suddenly recast and used to set aside the said presumption. It is elementary that there must be clear and convincing contradictory evidence for the Honorable Court to disregard the presumption of regularity,” the petitioners said.
As for Pizarro and Veloso, the BSP and MB said the two justices showed “indecent haste” in resolving the case.
“Assuming that the foregoing can be done in a so short a time, either of two possibilities come into mind; first, that the Special Division dedicated its entire time and effort in the last few days in coming out with the assailed Decision, ignoring all others; or second, that indeed, the case was rushed and the honorable court was less than judicious and diligent in its resolution,” the petitioners said.
“In either case, the facts do not inspire confidence to the honorable court in rendering the assailed decision, for which the inhibition is sought,” they added.