A Battle of TROs on Samar’s Annual Budget controversy

By EMY C. BONIFACIO, Samar News.com
November 13, 2010

CATBALOGAN CITY  –  The resolution of the annual budget controversy in the province of Samar is getting more complicated with more Temporary Restraining Orders that are being petitioned at the different judicial bodies by both camps.

The mess started when the proposed P1.179 Billion 2010 Annual Budget (AO 13-002) of Samar was irregularly or illegally passed on August 26, 2010, as alleged by the majority block of the legislative department of the province.

On August 27, a disclaimer which was manifested by seven Board Members was publicly circulated. The validity or legality of the passage of the Appropriation Ordinance 13-002 was formally filed in court with a prayer for the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order.

On August 31, 2010, Judge Reynaldo Clemens of RTC Branch 31 found the petitioners’ ground for the issuance of the TRO meritorious pending the resolution of the legality issue. The TRO was made effective within twenty days.

Moreover, on September 20, 2010, a Preliminary Injunction that restrained the implementation of AO 13-002 was released while the hearings for its nullification, as petitioned, have been scheduled at Judge Clemen’s sala.

Just recently, it was learned that Hon. Reynaldo B. Clemens, Branch 31 Presiding Judge and five other co-respondents of a case docketed as CA-G.R. No. 05422, petitioned the Eighteenth Division of the Court of Appeals in Cebu City to reconsider and set aside the CA Resolution promulgated on October 27, 2010 directing the issuance of a Temporary Restraining Order. The said motion was filed last November 4, 2010.

The petitioners pointed out that under the Special Civil Case No. 138, their main prayer is the declaration of nullity of Appropriation Ordinance No. 13-002 on the basis of illegality and irregularities of its passage. Furthermore, it was stressed  that prior to the passage of the questioned Appropriation Ordinance, the provincial government of Samar has been operating and conducting its official functions and business under a re-enacted budget. On this account, the provincial government operations remained unhampered and smooth, the petition made it clear.

It was also mentioned that during the hearings, the respondents did not move to dissolve the Preliminary Injunction Writ in question, but, opted to proceed to the hearing of the main case. The court’s attention was invited to the fact that the petitioner did not challenge the tenability and relief of the petition and jurisdiction of the RTC in Special Civil Action 138. Moreover, it was evident that the relief prayed for is mainly on annulling, lifting and setting aside of the injunction order dated September 20, 2010.

“In other words, the petitioner does not oppose any eventual declaration of nullity of the appropriation ordinance approving the annual budget of the province of Samar, provided that before any such declaration of nullity, she is unrestrained in making disbursements of the people’s money even if the validity of its appropriation is dubious.” explain the petitioners. This, according to them, is not just prejudicial to the higher interests of the province and the people of Samar, but, also, this will cause great and irreparable damage to them.

It would be recalled that on October 27, 2010, Associate Justice D. Sorongon of the same judicial body issued a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) for sixty (60) days enjoining the respondent judge, Hon. Reynaldo B. Clemens, together with all persons acting for and in his behalf from enforcing the Order dated September 20, 2010 in a Special Civil Action No. 138 entitled “Sermense, et al. vs. Tan et al.”

The Order, which was concurred by Executive Justice Portia Alino Hormachuelos and Associate Justice Socorro B. Inting, was issued favorably in behalf of Hon. Share Ann T. Tan, a petitioner for certiorari.

It was learned that Tan filed for a very urgent Motion for Issuance of Temporary Restraining Order/Preliminary Injunction and/or Status Quo Ante Order of injunction dated September 20, 2010 as well as for the issuance for a preliminary injunction and/or temporary restraining order enjoining respondent judge from continuing with the hearing of Special Civil Action No. 138 pending resolution of the said petition for certiorari.

According to the petitioner, their special prayer is continuously reiterated considering the seriousness and extreme urgency of the matters involved in the petition. It mentioned of the imminent lapse of Fiscal year 2010 which is just a little more than a couple of months within which the 2010 annual Budget may be implemented, as well as the “grave and irreparable injuries that are sustained and will continue to be sustained by the people of the Province of Samar due to the unfounded injunction of the implementation of the 2010 Annual Budget of the Province of Samar as ordered by public respondent Judge Reynaldo B. Clemens.”

Furthermore, it specifically mentioned of the non-payment of employees’ benefits such as the Productivity Enhancement Incentive, Step Increment and Representation allowance and Transportation Allowance (RATA) differential both for Calendar Years 2009 and 2010 and the implementation of the magna carta benefits for health workers due to the injunction of the implementation of the 2010 Annual Budget.

The cited grounds were found to be meritorious by the court. “Thus, so as to preserve the rights of the parties during the pendency of the instant petition and in order to prevent the judgment that may be promulgated by Us from being rendered moot and ineffectual, a Temporary Restraining Order is hereby issued”, partly states the Resolution.

As of this date, court decisions on the various petitions are being monitored by the Samarnons. While both camps insist on the legality of their actions, using public’s interest and welfare as an excuse, people are patiently hoping and waiting that what is due and best for the Samarnons will soon be given.