‘Fixer’ in Meralco case takes witness chair, more names surface
Aries Rufo, Newsbreak, abs-cbnNEWS.com | 08/20/2008 7:29 PM
Printer-friendly version | 
Send to friend | 
Share your views
More names are being dragged into the controversial Meralco case, from the mighty to anonymous tipsters.
Meralco president Manolo Lopez, former Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo, and top notch lawyers from the Villaraza, Cruz, Marcelo and Angangco law firm were mentioned in today’s hearing on the bribery scandal at the Court of Appeals.
The names rolled on while businessman Francis Roa de Borja, an alleged go-between in the attempted bribery, finally took the witness chair in the continuing probe of the Supreme Court panel.
De Borja was tagged by CA Justice Jose Sabio Jr., the acting chair of the CA Special Ninth Division that originally heard the corporate row between the Lopez family and the Government Service Insurance System (GSIS), as the one who offered a P10 million bribe. In exchange, Sabio would have to relinquish the case to Bienvenido Reyes, who was the original chair of the Ninth Division.
But de Borja, in his affidavit, countered that it was Sabio who quoted P50 million in exchange for resisting government pressure for him to decide against the Lopezes in the Meralco case.
Lopez’s name came up while de Borja was being grilled by former Justice Romeo Callejo Jr. on his motivations in asking Sabio for details of the Meralco case. De Borja and Sabio met at the lobby lounge of the Ateneo Law School in Rockwell on May 31, the date when Sabio became acting chair of the Ninth Division and when the temporary restraining order was issued on the Securities and Exchange Commission from interfering into the corporate row.
Asked if he knew the Meralco president, de Borja said Lopez was a high school acquaintance in Ateneo and only renewed friendship in recent years.
In one of the social gatherings, de Borja said he told Lopez that he knew Sabio from way back. However, Lopez “didn’t react.”
Inquired why he would mention to Lopez his connection with Sabio, de Borja said he thought that such fact “would be of interest to him.” De Borja said: “I was expecting him to be curious but he was deadma (couldn’t careless).”
The Firm
Callejo also asked de Borja if he personally knew Marcelo and lawyers Pancho Villaraza and Raul Angangco. Callejo noted that the Villaraza, Cruz, Marcelo and Angangco law firm is the counsel on record of the Lopezes in the Meralco squabble and de Borja met with Marcelo at the law firm’s office last Aug. 4. This was after de Borja surfaced with his affidavit, following Sabio’s claim of bribery by an alleged emissary of Meralco.
De Borja said he only knew Villaraza “as a friend.” He said he met with Marcelo because the latter sought for him through former Bulacan Rep. Willie Villarama. “Marcelo wanted to talk to me about the affidavit I gave,” de Borja said. “He asked me if what I said in the affidavit was the truth.”
“Did (Marcelo) tell you that the firm is (Lopezes’) counsel on the case?” asked Callejo, to which de Borja replied in the affirmative.
De Borja’s real interest
Callejo pressed de Borja of his seeming interest in the Meralco case when he is not a party of interest. De Borja’s standard reply was that the case was “of natural and abiding interest” to him.
Challenged by Callejo that de Borja’s real interest was that he actually wanted to get inside information on the Meralco case, the businessman said he merely wanted “to know what’s going on.”
Told that talking with Sabio on the case would be unethical, de Borja said that as a businessman, he was not aware of such complications. De Borja is a graduate of mechanical engineering and has a master’s degree in business administration.
Cross-examined by Sabio, de Borja took exception to the justice’s allusion that he is a “fixer.” At one point, Sabio admitted he got P300,000 from de Borja in exchange for his legal advice on the land property case involving the Roas sometime in 1993.
Sabio said he didn’t ask for the money but was voluntarily given by de Borja. “I felt [he gave me the money] was because he was happy (with the outcome),” Sabio said.
Sabio’s acceptance of the money however, appeared to bother panel member Flerida Ruth Romero. She asked de Borja what was Sabio’s reaction when he received the money and if he made a token resistance in receiving the money. Romero also asked if Sabio was an active regional trial court judge at that time.
Elamparo reprimanded
Meanwhile, GSIS vice-president for legal affairs and spokesperson Estrella Elamparo was scolded by Callejo for raising unfounded imputations on the impartiality of Justice Vicente Roxas on the Meralco case. Roxas penned the July 23 decision that favored the Lopezes.
The GSIS sought to inhibit Roxas from the case after receiving reports that Roxas met with Meralco lawyers shortly after the case was raffled. Elamparo, acting as counsel for GSIS, also raised the fact that Roxas has pending administrative cases in the SC and has peculiar interest in the Meralco case.
Asked however by Roxas how she got the information of his supposed meeting with Meralco lawyers, Elamparo said an unidentified female caller provided the information.
Asked by SC panel chair Carolina Grino-Aquino how she got the information on the pending administrative cases against Roxas, Elamparo said by browsing through the Internet and other sources.
She said she tried but failed to verify with the SC’s Office of Court Administrator on the status of the cases.
This prompted Callejo to reprimand Elamparo that she was not “candid” with her petition to inhibit Roxas and that she raised issues which were not fully backed by facts.
“As a lawyer and officer of the court, you should protect the integrity of the judiciary. You should be careful not misinterpret any facts,” Callejo said.
GSIS records
Meanwhile, the panel granted a motion by lawyer Vitaliano Aguirre to summon the records of the GSIS Human Resources Department showing the salary scale of the relatives of CA presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr. working with the state pension fund.
Vasquez, who ruled that it was the Ninth and not the Eighth Division that should handle the Meralco case, was accused of having conflict of interest in the Meralco case and, therefore, should have inhibited himself.
Vasquez sought to block the request but the panel decided that such information would be vital in determining the impropriety committed by CA justices in the Meralco case.
