By Gina Tabonares
Variety News Staff

THE 33 past and present GovGuam officials named as defendants in the complaint filed by an inmate yesterday filed their motion to dismiss the case, asserting their immunities from the charges.
Alexander Kitano filed the civil case against the 33 officials for not giving him a chance to work on his parole, which he says is a violation of his civil rights.
The 33 officials, including Gov. Felix P. Camacho, former Gov. Carl T.C. Gutierrez, Department of Corrections director Robert Camacho, Sen. Frank Ishizaki, R-Yona, who was sued in his capacity as former police chief, Guam Territorial Parole Board former chairman Jose Salas, chairman Soledad Chargualaf, members Connie Duenas, Francisco Marion, Edward Flores, Francisca Santos, Eustaquio Punzalan, Jesus Rivera, Angel Sablan and several John Does, yesterday answered Kitano’s complaint.
In a motion submitted by Deputy Attorney General William Bischoff, GovGuam officials argued that they have qualified immunity from all claims against them in their individual capacities.
The GovGuam defendants said there’s no clear constitutional right that exists for an inmate housed off-island to be transported to Guam for a personal appearance at parole hearings.
Bischoff said the defendants have no clear affirmative obligation to pay for the travel expenses of the plaintiff and the escorts that would be necessary for the exercise of that right if it does exist.
According to the defense, Kitano is a Guam prisoner serving a life sentence for the murder of a Guam prison guard.
The prisoner is being housed in a federal penitentiary at Lewisburg, Pennsylvania for security reason.
The GovGuam officials noted that Kitano has been eligible for parole for the last three or four years, but was denied during parole hearings because he was not physically present.
The defense stated that Kitano did not complain about not being permitted to submit documentary evidence, which can be done without being physically present at his parole hearings.
The complaint, according to the defendants, did not allege that others are not permitted to personally appear and testify on plaintiff’s behalf or that he is not permitted to appear by telephone or videoconference from the penitentiary in Pennsylvania.
The defendants’ motion also argued that none of the current and former GovGuam officials has done anything to intentionally interfere with any such right such as denying Kitano appropriated and available funds intended to pay for his and his escorts’ airfare.
“There are obvious costs that would be incurred in paying for the plaintiff and his necessary escorts to be flown to Guam for his parole hearings,” the motion stated.
The defense said the allegation of no equal protection is not applicable because Kitano is not in a similar situation as those of Guam prisoners who are housed on Guam and are physically present for personal appearances.
The GovGuam officials added that they are willing to accommodate Kitano’s appearing by telephone or by video conferencing, if available, for his parole hearings.
Kitano asked for a jury trial on his complaint to compel incumbent and past government officials to perform their duties as stated in the U.S. Constitution.
According to the prisoner, for almost four years, the defendants failed to provide him with statutory rights, which have always been provided to inmates in the Mangilao facility.
Kitano asked for a meaningful and adequate parole board meeting by returning him to the jurisdiction of the Guam Territorial Board.
Under the law, the Guam Territorial Parole Board is responsible for releasing a prisoner or denying parole, and should afford the opportunity to inmates to personally appear to present documents related to the sentence when eligible for parole.