OMALAHOKAN
TRO: Temporary Restraining Order
by Atty. Francisco D. Yap

As the term suggests, TRO is temporary as differentiated from permanent. A restraining or der is temporary whereas a preliminary mandatory injunction as the name suggest is preliminary, meaning before the case will be decided after hearing. That is why as the name suggests it is preliminary, meaning before the case is decided on the merits. A preliminary injunction may last while the case is pending or until further order of the court.

The court may issue a status quo order for the parties to maintain the status quo ante or before the controversy.

Honestly, even lawyers are confused, and have different interpretations on these legal mumbo jumbo, so Iíll forgive you if you are now confused with all these legalese language which only lawyers can understand, perhaps intentionally, so that lawyers will not be out of business.

What is not in the law is that, TRO is usually for sale by corrupt judges. Sometimes it is bidded out, so the corrupt official usually wins the unofficial or secret bidding because of the corrupt officials unlimited funds.

The cost or price of getting a TRO may involved millions of pesos. And the lifting or the extension of the TRO to preliminary injunction may ripen into a bidding war.

The best trial strategy is to file a certiorari, or a case before the higher court suing the lower court for grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack of jurisdiction or in laymanís term that the order being questioned is null and void for being contrary to law.

Even the supreme court has acknowledge the existence of corruption in the issuance of temporary restraining order ( TRO ) or grant of writs of preliminary injunction. Chief Justice Hilario G. Davide on June 25 1999, issued Administrative Circular No. 07-99, To: All judges of lower court,. Re: Exercise of utmost caution, prudence and judiciousness in issuance of temporary restraining orders and writs of preliminary injunctions. That irregularities, including corruption, might have influenced the issuance of the TRO or the writ of preliminary injunction. Judges are thus enjoined to observe utmost caution, prudence and judiciousness in the issuance of TRO and in the grant of writs of preliminary injunction to avoid any suspicion that its issuance of TRO and in the grant of writs of preliminary injunction to avoid any suspicion that its issuance or grant was for considerations other than the strict merits of the case.

Sometimes the courts in important cases, engage in letting the parties bid for the outcome of the case involving millions of pesos, through their surrogate agents who are engage in that kind of practice of law... influence peddling.

The NBI should engaged in buy-bust operations in the judiciary and I am sure a lot of Judges will be caught in the act. This is within the jurisdiction of the executive branch of the government because this involves the suppression of criminal activity.

Just like their drive on corrupt policemen, President Duterte should order buy-bust operations of Judges and I am sure a number of judges will go to jail.

Prosecution of criminal cases cannot be enjoined except in exceptional cases.

So what happened to the findings or resolution of the OMBUDSMAN, finding probable cause for the filing of criminal cases against a Governor of Negros Oriental?

ABANGAN ANG SUSUNOD NA KABANATA!


HTML Comment Box is loading comments...