SC denies Trillanes bid to junk P5-M civil suit over 'Hacienda Binay' issue

The Supreme Court (SC) First Division has affirmed the denial of a lower court of Senator Antonio Trillanes IV's bid to junk a P5-million civil suit filed by a businessman he had called a "dummy" owner of the "Hacienda Binay" estate in Batangas.

In a March 14 ruling, the SC division through Associate Justice Noel Tijam denied Trillanes' petition for certiorari challenging the May and December 2015 orders of Judge Evangeline Castillo-Marigomen of the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 101 by invoking parliamentary immunity.

The RTC judge had also denied Trillanes' motion to dismiss the damages complaint filed against him by businessman Antonio Tiu, who he had called before the media a "front," "nominee," or "dummy" of former vice president Jejomar Binay.

"Hacienda Binay" is a 350-hectare property in Rosario, Batangas, 150 hectares of which had allegedly been developed to contain, among others, paved roads, manicured lawns, a mansion with a pool, man-made lakes, and a horse stable with practice race tracks.

"All told, for its procedural infirmity and lack of merit, the petition must be dismissed," the ruling penned by Tijam said.

Tiu claimed in a Oct. 22, 2014 complaint with the RTC that he was not a dummy and was instead a "legitimate businessman" whose reputation was "severely tarnished" by Trillanes' "defamatory statements."

He asked for P4 million in moral damages, P500,000 in exemplary damages, and P500,000 in attorney's fees.

Taking his lost case directly the SC, Trillanes said his parliamentary immunity was threatened by the Quezon City court, which he alleged acted with grave abuse of discretion.

The SC was unconvinced, saying it was "evident" that the senator's remarks "fall outside the privilege of speech or debate" under Section 11, Article VI of the 1987 Constitution.

The statements which Trillanes admitted to making were not part of any speech or in the course of any debate in the Senate, the SC said.

"It cannot likewise be successfully contended that they were made in the official discharge of performance of petitioner's duties as a Senator, as the remarks were not part of or integral to the legislative process," the ruling stated.

The SC also asserted that the courts have jurisdiction over Trillanes' case, which involves "defamatory statements" not covered by privileged speech.

Dismissing Trillanes' argument that Tiu failed to state a cause of action against him, the SC held that whether or not Tiu's allegations were true, they were "sufficient to enable the court to render judgment" according to the businessman's prayer before the court.

Tijam's ponencia had concurrences from Associate Justice Teresita de Castro, Mariano del Castillo, and Francis Jardeleza. —JST, GMA News