Lawyer fined for falsely accusing justice

10/27/2008

The Supreme Court (SC) has found a lawyer guilty of indirect contempt after he failed to prove his P10-million bribery case against a magistrate of the high court.

In a 32-page per curiam decision, the SC found Atty. Victor De La Serna guilty of indirect contempt for falsely accusing Associate Justice Dante Tinga of accepting P10 million bribe from a certain businessman named Johnny Chan in exchange for a favorable decision in a property dispute case.

For failing to prove his allegation, the high court ordered De la Serna to pay a fine of P30,000 and warned him that he faces a more severe penalty once he repeats his accusation against Tinga or any other justice.

“Atty. De la Serna has transcended the permissible bounds of fair comment and criticism. His irresponsible and baseless statements, his unrepentant stance and smug insistence of his malicious and unfounded accusation against Justice Tinga have sullied the dignity and authority of this court,” the SC said in its ruling.

De la Serna had acted as the legal counsel of the party with whom Chan was involved in a property row. That party was headed by a certain Carmelita Fudot.

De la Serna earlier sought Tinga’s inhibition from the case after the SC, in a Sept. 13, 2007 decision which was penned by the latter, junked Fudot’s petition, seeking to protect her rights over the said property.

The high court had also junked Fudot’s motion for reconsideration in a resolution it issued out last Feb. 6.

De la Serna said Tinga’s decision reeks of bribery as Chan even admitted that he had already given him P10 million to decide in his favor.

He said this was the reason Chan had suddenly stopped all negotiations for the purchase of Fudot’s property, while he himself had received information that a favorable decision on the case was already forthcoming.

De la Serna also based his claim of bribery on the fact that the case was decided in less than two years as compared to another case he previously handled which took the court more than 10 years to resolve.

He insisted that Fudot’s case was picked out from 20,000 other pending cases.

The SC, however, branded De la Serna’s accusations as a “hastily concocted story” brought to cast doubts on the integrity not only of Justice Tinga, but also of the entire SC.”

First, the high tribunal noted that Chan, “the person most involved” in the issue, had denied making the statement that he gave P10 million to Tinga or to any other justice.

The SC further said De la Serna’s claim that Chan had advance knowledge of the decision “does not dovetail with logic and common sense” considering that the latter was still insisting to have a meeting with him on Sept. 25, 2007 in an attempt to settle the case amicably.

“Had he (Chan) known about the decision earlier, and more importantly, had he really paid P10 million for a favorable decision, he would not have reiterated his offer or suggest any further meeting with De la Serna for the purchase of the subject property. The exercise would be downright irrational,” the SC noted in its ruling.

The high court also gave credence to the claim of Chan that he learned of the SC decision only sometime in October 2007, from his legal representative, Paulino Petralba.

The SC also pointed out that the case was decided in less than two years in compliance with its constitutional duty to decide cases within two years. PNA

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006