MANILA, Philippines (UPDATE) - Controversial Pasig City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 167 presiding judge Rolando Mislang has submitted his compliance to the Supreme Court's (SC) Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) order for him to explain his issuance of 2 temporary restraining orders (TRO) that halted preliminary investigation proceedings and the filing of information in a criminal case for syndicated estafa against Globe Asiatique (GA) Realty Holding Corporation's Delfin Lee.

In a 5-page letter-compliance addressed to Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez, Mislang stressed the existence of a "prejudicial question" that warranted his issuance of the TROs.

"While, as a rule, criminal prosecutions may not be enjoined, there are settled exceptions, among which is the existence of a prejudicial question," Mislang said.

The prejudicial question referred to by Mislang is a civil case pending before Makati City Branch 58 filed by GA against the Home Development Mutual Fund (HDMF/Pag-IBIG Fund).

GA insists the civil case materially affects the criminal case filed against Lee and several others before the Department of Justice (DOJ) in connection with P6.65 billion in loans taken by GA's alleged ghost and special buyers from Pag-IBIG Fund for the GA Xevera housing project in Mabalacat, Pampanga.

"Globe Asiatique maintains that the elements of the prejudicial question are present. Should RTC-Makati, Branch 58 adjudge the action for specific performance in favor of Globe Asiatique, then the element of damage in estafa as [claimed by] HDMF and the replacement buyers would be inexistent," Mislang said.

In its civil case, GA is seeking to compel HDMF to comply with various agreements allowing the property developer to update the defaulting accounts with payments or to replace the defaulting Pag-IBIG borrowers with new ones acting as replacement buyers. The replacement buyers are the complainants in the syndicated estafa case.

Amid criticisms he issued a writ of preliminary injunction on top of the TROs in spite of the OCA directive, Mislang pointed out that a hearing was conducted on Lee's application for the issuance of the writ.

"[The] court issued a notice of hearing on the urgent motion on August 26, 2011, at 8:30 o'clock in the morning, copies of which were personally [served to] the parties. On August 26, 2011, the hearing proceeded in the morning and continued in the afternoon. Both parties argued on their respective positions," Mislang said.

"Afterwhich, the matter on the application for TRO on the Amended Petition and the issuance of the writ of preliminary injunction are both deemed submitted for resolution. The parties were directed to submit simultaneous memoranda in support of the main case," he said.

DOJ: Mislang railroaded proceedings

In an earlier interview with Justice Secretary Leila De Lima, however, De Lima accused Mislang of railroading the proceedings.

The justice chief said Mislang issued the injunctive writ on September 5 even before parties could submit their memoranda until September 10.

"The gall of that judge. Masyado siyang brazen. He was being required already by the Supreme Court, through the Office of the Court Administrator to justify the issuance of the TRO... out and out railroading na yan," De Lima said then.

Vice-President Jejomar Binay, one of the complainants in the consolidated estafa case, also expressed dismay at Mislang's actions.

In a statement issued last September 7, Binay said: "I am extremely disgusted by the callousness of Judge Mislang. He issued the preliminary injunction fully aware that the legality and propriety of his TROs are being questioned, and that the Court Administrator has directed him to explain his actions."

"It is apparent that the release of the preliminary injunction has been railroaded to the damage and prejudice of the government and the victims. Judge Mislang, by his actions, is directly challenging President Aquino's campaign against corruption," Binay said.

While the 2 TROs had the effectivity of 20 days each, an injunctive writ lasts until lifted by the trial court or until the case pending before the trial court is decided.

Mislang: Critics forgot separation of powers

In his letter-compliance, Mislang accused Binay, De Lima, and another critic, Senator Francis Pangilinan, of villifying him at the expense of the principle of separation of powers among the 3 branches of government.

"The undersigned has been the object of villification by, among others, no less than the Honorable Vice-President of the Republic, Senator Francis Pangilinan and the Honorable Secretary of Justice, who, albeit lawyers, appear to have totally forgotten the very fundamental and elementary principle of separation of powers, professing their views evidently based on misinformation as gospel truth and supplanting their executive/legislative opinions over judicial discretion," Mislang said.

The embattled judge also asked for Marquez "to take the cudgels for him and all members of the judiciary similarly situated."

"[I]f only so that we may be spared of the unnecessary and uncalled for anxiety not only upon our persons, but more importantly, upon our families who, at times, cannot quite understand the perceived silence of our superiors," Misland said.

Speaking to reporters at a news conference today, Marquez said: "As much as I want to take the cudgels, I cannot do so because I will also have to give my recommendations."

As Supreme Court administrator, Marquez has administrative supervision over all lower courts and investigates administrative complaints against justices of the Court of Appeals (CA), Sandiganbayan, Court of Tax Appeals (CTA), and the trial courts.

An administrative complaint was filed against Mislang before Marquez's office last September 6 by the HDMF.

The 5-page complaint accused Mislang of "evident bad faith and malice" in issuing the TROs on the GA cases constituting (a) gross ignorance of the law and procedure on injunctive relief and prejudicial question; (b) grave misconduct; (c) knowingly rendering an unjust order, which is also defined and punishable under Article 206 of the Revised Penal Code; (d) violation of Section 3(e) of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act on causing any undue injury to any party, including the Government, or giving any private party any unwarranted benefits, advantage or preference in the discharge of his official administrative or judicial functions through manifest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence; and (e) a malicious delay in the administration of justice under Article 207 of the Revised Penal Code.

Mislang: I acted in good faith; media bloated reports

In his letter-compliance, Mislang told Marquez he "did not act with undue haste, much less with grave abuse of discretion in issuing the TROs but acted in good faith and in accordance with his solemn duty to dispose of matters pending before him with reasonable promptness."

He stressed that if he, at all, erred, the error was that of an "honest error of judgement, to which the remedy of appeal is available to the dissatisfied litigant."

"I trust the foregoing explanation will serve to enlighten the Honorable Court Administrator on the bases for my orders in the case that were bloated by the media reports and myriad speculations which placed the undersigned in a bad light and undue harassment," Mislang said.

The OCA has yet to act on Mislang's compliance and the complaint filed by HDMF.

"It's already being evaluated. Another concern that we have to address though is that Pag-IBIG already filed a complaint and any resolution on the order for Judge Mislang to explain might affect that complaint filed by Pag-IBIG," Marquez said.