From left, House Floor Leader Edwin Propst, former Rep. Tina Sablan and Sen. Celina Babauta.
THREE of the House members who voted to impeach former Gov. Ralph DLG Torres over two years ago lashed out at a Superior Court ruling that disqualified the Office of the Attorney General from prosecuting Torres, who was charged with contempt and misconduct in office over first-class air travel.
House Floor leader Edwin Propst said Judge Pro Tem Arthur Barcinas’s decision was a “travesty of justice,” adding that he may call for a “legislative inquiry into possible judicial misconduct in the CNMI.”
Former Rep. Tina Sablan, speaking as a private citizen, said the judge’s ruling was a “serious miscarriage of justice.”
Former Rep. and now Sen. Celina R. Babauta said the ruling “is not only misguided but also undermines the very principles of justice and accountability.”
Citing “conflict of interest,” Judge Barcinas disqualified the OAG including Assistant Attorney General James Robert Kingman, from prosecuting the former governor.
Judge Barcinas also declined to appoint a new special prosecutor. He said because the court is “unable to appoint the Office of the Public Auditor to prosecute in lieu of the OAG, the court instead defers to the executive branch to execute its prosecutorial authorities in the case.”
Propst said he is “very disappointed, but not at all surprised by Judge Barcinas’ decision in the Torres corruption case, based on the way he’s been running his courtroom and mishandling his cases in the CNMI.”
“This is a travesty of justice,” Propst reiterated. “Several of my colleagues and I have been discussing the need for a legislative inquiry into possible judicial misconduct in the CNMI, especially in the judiciary’s handling of critical public corruption cases. In my view, Judge Barcinas’ latest decision reinforces that need. I will be taking up this discussion again with my colleagues.”
He added, “In disqualifying the entire Office of the Attorney General and the special prosecutor and declining to appoint a new special prosecutor or make any referrals to the Office of the Public Auditor, Judge Barcinas has essentially declared that the governor is above the law.”
“The judge says he defers to the governor to exercise his executive power to appoint his own special prosecutor,” Propst said. “What if the governor was still Ralph Torres? This ruling defies logic and creates a constitutional crisis.”
“I urge Attorney General Ed Manibusan to take all necessary steps to appeal to the Supreme Court to reverse the absurd and unjust Barcinas ruling. Let us remember that we are governed by laws not kings,” Propst added.
Sablan said “Judge Barcinas’ latest decision in the Torres case is a serious miscarriage of justice that erodes public trust in the CNMI judicial system.”
“Sadly, it’s one in a litany of questionable rulings the Guam judge has made in the CNMI public corruption cases assigned to him,” she said.
“I hope the attorney general moves swiftly to seek relief from the Supreme Court to ensure this travesty of a ruling does not stand. I also hope the Supreme Court ensures that someone other than Judge Barcinas is assigned to hear that petition,” said Sablan.
“The Torres public corruption cases are matters of significant public interest. We need fair and reasonable jurists who are well versed in CNMI law and precedent to finally provide the people of the CNMI — and Mr. Torres — their day in court,” Sablan added.
In a statement, Senator Babauta said she was “deeply disappointed” by Judge Barcinas’ ruling.
“His decision to disqualify the Attorney General’s Office from prosecuting former governor Ralph Torres and to infringe upon the independent authority of our Attorney General to hire a special prosecutor is not only misguided but also undermines the very principles of justice and accountability,” Babauta said.
“The defense’s motion for reconsideration of an issue settled, literally, years ago by previous pro tem Judge Tolentino was due within 10 days and was instead late by hundreds of days. Judge Barcinas should never have ruled on the motion in the first place.
“His ruling, punting to the executive branch to appoint a special prosecutor, is concerning. The separation of powers in our government is clear: the Attorney General’s office is entrusted with the responsibility to prosecute, independent of political influence.
“This decision’s holding that Torres needed to be charged in his official capacity is just nonsense. As a jurist of many years, Barcinas should know perfectly well that there is simply no such thing as an official capacity defendant in a criminal context, as opposed to a civil lawsuit for deprivation of civil rights.
“As a pro tempore judge domiciled in Guam, Judge Barcinas has concocted an unworkable rule for our CNMI that our AG’s dual duties as prosecutor and advisor to the executive branch are inherently in conflict. Yet Guam’s own Supreme Court has just held the opposite in a dispute between their Governor and AG. Barcinas has not only overstepped his bounds but also compromised the integrity of our judicial process. The Office of the Attorney General should not be told to stand down and let the current governor prosecute the former governor. Judge Barcinas’ ruling is ridiculous.
“If Judge Barcinas believes that the Attorney General’s office is conflicted, perhaps he should take a moment to look in the mirror. He presided over a closely related civil case on appeal in the CNMI Supreme Court after ex-governor Torres lost his lawsuit against the House JGO Committee. He waited until the end of the Torres administration to issue his ruling that the case was moot. This was a case where ‘justice delay is justice denied.’ Judge Barcinas is now handling the criminal case against ex-governor Torres in the CNMI Superior Court. Judge Barcinas had a clear conflict that he has totally ignored and his ruling accusing the AG’s Office of a conflict is akin to the pot calling the kettle black.
“His decision appears to be an overreach that sets a dangerous precedent, potentially opening the door for political interference in judicial matters. Judge Barcinas’ ruling does not serve justice; rather, it erodes the public’s trust in our legal system and threatens the independent functioning of our judicial institutions.
“We must uphold the principles of fairness, accountability, and independence in our judiciary. The Attorney General’s office must be allowed to carry out its duties without undue interference. Our community deserves transparency and justice, free from political maneuvering.
“I urge the appropriate authorities to review and challenge this ruling. Our judiciary must step in and preserve the integrity of our judicial system and ensure that justice is served impartially and independently. This decision is so out of step with the law that a writ of mandamus may be appropriate to correct it.
“Furthermore, I urge our judiciary to review and reassess Judge Barcinas’ role in the CNMI Judiciary considering his spotty judicial record in Guam, a record that reflects slow and twisted justice. A special court with the judiciary of Guam dealing with judicial discipline filed formal charges of judicial misconduct against Barcinas in May 2015 and he apparently has not learned his lesson.
“Barcinas has also been admonished by the Guam Supreme Court for the appearance of bias in a major land case with implications for many island landowners.
“Judge Arthur Barcinas is alleged to have failed to promptly and efficiently dispose of cases under advisement in his court. Some matters took 300 to 800 days to be acted on when court rules state actions on motions must be taken within a 90-day or 120-day time window.
“Is it really in the interest of our Commonwealth to keep appointing a judge with such a track record to handle our islands’ most sensitive and consequential cases when our own judges are unable to hear them?”
Variety was unable to get a comment from Judge Barcinas.
