Govendo has submitted motions for reconsideration and to disqualify in response to the Supreme Court ruling that he violated judicial canons and rules when he said “adios muchacho” to a wife beater.
The Aug. 25, 2010 ruling was signed by Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan, Associate Justice Alexandro C. Castro, and Justice Pro Tem Edward Manibusan.
Govendo said the Supreme Court should reconsider its previous ruling against him “in light of new evidence that Chief Justice Miguel S. Demapan’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned.”
The judge argued that Demapan “cannot render a fair and dispassionate opinion in [the] judicial discipline matter because of [Demapan’s] bias or prejudice toward…Govendo.”
Govendo on Feb. 12, 2008 requested Presiding Judge Robert Naraja to ask “the Commonwealth Bar Association to investigate the behavior of Roman S. Demapan [the chief justice’s brother] regarding his involvement in the unauthorized practice of law regarding the Estate of Angel Maliti.”
Roman Demapan allegedly received contingency fees and was involved in unauthorized fee splitting with a non-attorney, Govendo said.
He said he received a letter on Aug. 16, 2010 from the chairman of the Commonwealth Bar Association’s disciplinary committee stating that the matter involving the chief justice’s brother should be brought to the Superior Court for further proceedings.
Govendo said this was the first time he received any correspondence regarding the complaint against Roman S. Demapan in 2008.
Govendo said he is “reluctantly making [the] motion [to] disqualify…Chief Justice Demapan from this matter.”
“I firmly believe that Chief Justice Demapan cannot act without bias and prejudice toward me in this matter,” Govendo said.
He added: “The Demapan family is very tight knit, close family. On information and belief, I was informed that when Juan S. Demapan was on trial in federal court, Chief Justice Demapan was present during the jury selection, as well as closing arguments. When another brother, Antonio S. Demapan, pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor before [Govendo] in 2010, Roman S. Demapan was also present in court.”
“It is my belief that because of these instances Chief Justice Demapan knows that Roman S. Demapan’s disciplinary matter is back in Superior Court for additional proceedings and know that I was the one who requested the presiding judge to send a letter to the Bar Association’s disciplinary committee regarding his brother,” Govendo said.
“Based on the foregoing,” he added, “it is my belief that Chief Justice Demapan will not be able to separate his dislike for me and the actions I have taken against his brother from his duty to render a dispassionate and fair opinion in this judicial disciplinary matter.”
In the event the Supreme Court denies his motion for reconsideration, Govendo requests that the chief justice be “disqualif[ied] from the sanctioning portion…so that Judge Govendo may receive a fair and impartial panel for the remainder of [the] disciplinary proceedings.”
