Gov's aide laughs off, belittles SC ruling
No bearing to prov'l admin post, he says
Much ado about nothing. In fact, so what if as Provincial Administrator he has been declared not a resident of Iloilo province. He can always buy a house or rent a hut to remedy the situation.
Such summed up the reaction of the top aide of Iloilo Governor Niel Tupas Sr. following a Supreme Court (SC) Decision upholding a Lower Court exclusion proceeding against his person.
In fact, for Provincial Administrator Manuel Mejorada, the SC ruling has no effect nor any bearing to his position. Never mind too that the law provides as basic requirement that all provincial administrators must be a resident of the province he/she is appointed to serve.
Mejorada's reaction was heard over Bombo Radyo Iloilo in an interview with Nowell Relatos. The topmost aide and alter-ego of Tupas, Mejorada also downplayed possibilities of his exit from the governor's circle of Capitol trustees. No way that the SC ruling will cause his removal from post, he said with confidence.
And if the law calls for a resident of the province in his appointed position, so be it, he said, saying he will easily cure this. He is also ready to register anew and again in the disputed Barangay Amparo, Pavia, Iloilo still.
Either way, Mejorada told Bombo Radyo that there is no truth to reports of his forthcoming removal from office.
Asked to comment on Mejorada's statement, lawyer Cornelio Panes came back with a question, "How would he explain the continuing and mandatory requirement of residency in the office of the Provincial Administrator? I would not expect him to say he's stepping down for that."
"For us professionals, what is important is we won the case four times for our client," Panes added. "If stepping down will not serve justice, then his perjury cases for lying under oath in his employment may do."
Panes stands as counsel of Mejorada's opponent in the case, Secretary Augusto Boboy Syjuco, Director-General of the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority (Tesda).
To recall, the SC has ruled to "deny with finality" Mejorada's Motion for Reconsideration on an earlier lower court judgment. Finding no compelling reasons to warrant a reversal, the SC upheld a February 19, 2008 Resolution that excluded Mejorada from the voters' list of Barangay Amparo, Pavia, Iloilo.
As such, no further pleadings will ever be entertained, the SC ruling added.
The SC ruling was dated June 10, 2008 in an En Banc decision yet was made public only over the weekend.
"Let entry of judgment be made in due course," it further stated with copies sent to the Solicitor General, Commission on Elections and the Election Registration Board of Pavia among others.
The case dragged to the Court of Appeals (CA) Special Nineteenth Division denying Mejorada's Petition to set aside the exclusion case against him.
The CA Resolution was docketed as CA-G.R. CEB-SP No.02173 where Associate Justice Agustin Dizon found Mejorada's Petition "bereft of merit" thus the denial.
Associate Justices Isaias Dicdican and Priscilla Baltazar-Padilla concurred with the said CA Decision.
Mejorada in his CA Petition not only moved to set aside his exclusion from the voters' list in Pavia, Iloilo. He also prayed for damages since "due to unfounded and malicious suit," he suffered sleepless nights, besmirched reputation and social humiliation.
And considering his stature as provincial official, Mejorada further argued to the CA, moral damages of P500,000 was due him alongside thousands more for his legal and litigation expenses. Also, Mejorada told the CA, the exclusion case was nothing but a suit "filed for the sole purpose of molesting and causing him to incur expenses" and it was also baseless and meant to harass him.
Mejorada blamed his former boss, Secretary Syjuco as the one responsible for all the charges, an act he said that meant to get back at him for exposing Syjuco's anomalies.
On the issue of his residency in Pavia, Mejorada maintains the regularity of such saying he only kept his city address and residence in Jaro, Iloilo City "for convenience only."
And he cannot be excluded in Pavia's voters' list since it was there where he cast his vote in the 2004 elections. Further still, Mejorada charged that the Lower Courts committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or in excess of jurisdiction.
The CA altogether junked his arguments.
"The petition is bereft of merit. It has already been established in the lower courts based on the evidence on record, both documentary and testimonial that petitioner Manuel P. Mejorada is neither a resident nor a domiciliary within the purview of election laws of Brgy. Amparo, Pavia, Iloilo," excerpts of the CA Decision went.