Oriental Mindoro Gov. Alfonso Umali Jr. has sought the inhibition of a Sandiganbayan justice from hearing his motion to overturn the 10-year prison sentence the antigraft court meted out to him in connection with a graft case.
Umali, also the treasurer of the ruling Liberal Party, was found guilty by the Sandiganbayan鈥檚 Fourth Division of violating Republic Act No. 3019, the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, for his role in facilitating a P2.5-million loan the provincial government granted to a private ship owner in 1994.
In his motion for inhibition, Umali accused Associate Justice Jose Hernandez, Fourth Division chair, of prejudice in favor of the prosecution after the clerk of court allegedly told Umali鈥檚 lawyers on May 8 the court was no longer going to hear his motion to reverse its April 20 verdict.
He said the court official also told his lawyers that Hernandez, who had written the 37-page decision finding Umali guilty, would not allow them to file a reply to the petition filed by the state prosecutors questioning Umali鈥檚 motion for reconsideration.
鈥淭his鈥� gave accused Umali and his lawyers the impression that (Hernandez) was biased in favor of the prosecution and that he intended to hastily resolve or deny (Umali鈥檚 appeal) without giving him an opportunity to refute first the prosecution鈥檚 arguments in its opposition,鈥� said Umali鈥檚 16-page motion dated May 28.
鈥淐onsidering that (Hernandez) does not appear to be impartial, accused Umali respectfully requests that he take the noble course and strive for his higher calling to uphold the integrity of, and promote faith, in the courts, and accordingly recuse himself and voluntarily inhibit from further hearing and handling the鈥� case,鈥� the motion said.
In seeking Hernandez鈥檚 voluntary inhibition, the governor also assailed the justice for asking questions of defense witness Manolo Brotonel during the hearing of Feb. 10, 2011, which were 鈥渕ore adversarial and confrontational than clarificatory.鈥�
Umali said the magistrate鈥檚 actions gave him the 鈥渋mpression that he was taking up the cudgels for the prosecution.鈥�
鈥�(Hernandez) cannot be expected to act in an impartial and unbiased manner in handling the instant case. He might be an impartial justice. However, he does not appear to be impartial or beyond any suspicion of bias in favor of the prosecution,鈥� Umali said.
Umali reminded Hernandez that a judge should 鈥減ut the greater interest of the courts first and above his own鈥� and that his 鈥渂attle cry must be to protect the integrity and reputation of the courts.鈥�