Ex-BI execs Argosino, Robles lose recusal plea vs. 3 Sandigan magistrates

Former Immigration deputy commissioners Al Argosino and Michael Robles have lost their plea for the inhibition of three Sandiganbayan justices over their alleged bias in hearing their P50-million bribery case.

In a resolution dated January 28, the Sixth Division said the motion for inhibition of Argosino and Robles was “sorely lacking” of proof of the bias and partiality of the three justices on the bench.

“They did not even cite any specific Resolution, or any particular instance which would indicate that this Court's rulings were grounded on something other than what was learned during the course of the proceedings,” the Sandiganbayan said.

Robles had sought for the recusal of division chairperson Associate Justice Sarah Jane Fernandez, whom he said was a classmate of lawyer Laurence Arroyo, counsel of his co-accused, retired cop Wally Sombero.

Robles said any decision from Fernandez and the Sixth Division would be the subject of suspicion.

Argosino adopted the motion of his former colleague and likewise sought the inhibition of Associate Justices Karl Miranda and Zaldy Trespeses.

The Sandiganbayan said Fernandez and Arroyo were mere acquiantances in college and law school.

“She does not recall any substantial interaction between them, if there was any interaction at all, after they took the bar examinations and became lawyers, or even when they were students,” the resolution penned by Fernandez read.

The Sandiganbayan also cited a Supreme Court decision stating a classmate’s appearance before a judge is not a ground for voluntary inhibition, unless proven otherwise by the parties.

“Their claim that Justice Fernandez will be subject to suspicions of bias and partiality, for or against the accused, by the mere fact that she and Atty. Arroyo were classmates, is not grounded on evidence, much less, clear and convincing evidence, but on speculation, surmises or conjectures,” the Sandiganbayan said.

It added Argosino and Robles failed to identify instances showing the bias of the three justices as a collegial body.

The Sandiganbayan said it was also wrong for the former BI officials to assert their deprivation of liberty, noting that they were insiting to leave the anti-graft court’s premises before the approval of their bail bonds on the non-plunder charges last year.

“Absent any allegation of acts or conduct indicative of arbitrariness or prejudice on the part of this Court's Justices, there would be nothing to prove,” the Sandiganbayan said.

Argosino, Robles, and Sombero face plunder, graft, direct bribery, and violation of Presidential Decree No. 46 in connection with the P50-million bribery scandal at BI.

The two former BI officials allegedly received the money from Sombero, the middleman of Chinese businessman Jack Lam, in exchange for assistance in the release of 1,316 illegal workers found in Clark, Pampanga in 2016. —KBK, GMA News