Court asked to junk Binay damage suit
Two of the 13 defendants in the P200-million damage suit filed last month by Vice President Jejomar Binay have asked the court to junk the charges of libel and violation of the Civil Code against them.
Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano and former Makati barangay chair Nicolas Enciso VI filed this week separate motions to dismiss the civil suit slapped by Vice President Jejomar Binay against them over what he said were “malicious accusations” they made against him in connection with alleged anomalies in Makati when he was the city mayor.
Cayetano and Enciso were two of the 13 defendants named in the P200-million damage suit filed last month by Binay for libel and violation of the Civil Code. Included in the suit were lawmakers, government officials and the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
The two motions were filed on the sala of Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 133 Presiding Judge Elpidio Calis.
Three grounds
In an interview after a hearing on Friday, Cayetano’s lawyer Alfred Jacinto said his client’s motion to dismiss was based on three grounds.
Article continues after this advertisementOne was Binay’s complaint’s “failure to state a cause of action.”
Article continues after this advertisement“Because we are saying that all the statements VP Binay is complaining about are absolutely privileged because they were given during the course of the Senate investigation. Based on (Supreme Court) decisions, those are absolutely privileged that’s why they are not actionable. A senator cannot be charged for those statements,” he said.
Second, the lawyer said even if the statements were “not absolutely privileged, his (Cayetano’s) statements have basis because (they) were taken from Senate proceedings.”
“Because of course it cannot be that when you go to the Senate the senators cannot speak about what happened in the proceedings. That should also be protected,” Jacinto said.
‘Trifling with court’
Third, Jacinto said “they are kind of trifling with the courts,” but refused to elaborate.
In his 10-page motion, Enciso argued that Binay’s civil complaint should be dismissed because aside from the fact that it did “not state a valid cause of action” it was “premature.”
The motion said the criminal case of plunder filed by Enciso’s codefendant, losing Makati mayoral candidate Renato Bondal, against Binay and others in connection with alleged anomalies in the construction of the Makati City Hall Building II has remained pending in the Office of the Ombudsman.
“Let it be stressed here… that to be entitled to damages, the prosecution must be terminated in plaintiff’s favor for lack of probable cause,” the motion said.
In an ambush interview, Bondal, who represents himself and codefendants Mario Hechanova, former Makati City bids and awards committee vice chair and former Makati Vice Mayor Ernesto Mercado, said he was set to file another motion to dismiss the suit on their behalf.
‘No jurisdiction’
He said in their motion, they were including a “very important ground which was jurisdiction.”
“We feel that the matters raised by the plaintiff is a political question and therefore we honestly feel the court has no jurisdiction to entertain this case,” Bondal said.
At press time, however, Bondal et al’s motion had not been filed in court.
Ombudsman Conchita Carpio-Morales, Sen. Antonio Trillanes, Caloocan Rep. Edgar Erice, Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas head Amando Tetangco Jr., Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Teresita Herbosa, Insurance Commission commissioner Emmanuel Dooc and Julia Abad of the Anti-Money Laundering Council are coaccused in the P200-million suit.
