Ceres drivers fight back-3
By Modesto P. Sa-onoy We continue with yesterday’s narration of the complaint. At this point, the complainants were retracing the root of this case against the VTI management, lawyers, and assorted number of people who would like to prove their loyalty to the ruling power in the company. It is this imprudent sense of loyalty

By Staff Writer
By Modesto P. Sa-onoy
We continue with yesterday’s narration of the complaint. At this point, the complainants were retracing the root of this case against the VTI management, lawyers, and assorted number of people who would like to prove their loyalty to the ruling power in the company. It is this imprudent sense of loyalty that placed them in hot water with the law.
“The decision to park at the Compound,” the narrative continued, “was both the personal decisions of the drivers and their conductors and voluntary as clearly and categorically stated by Complainants in their respective and separate sworn affidavits. However, Y2 with respondent Nixon Banibane as complainant filed charges of Anti-Carnapping Act, Violation of Public Service Act, Grave Coercion and other crimes against the Y4 and several other respondents last August 30, 2019 before the Office of the City Prosecutor (OCP) of Bacolod City.”
As was already reported “Assistant City Prosecutor Eric C. Opriasa and as Acting City Prosecutor – Bacolod City in a Resolution dated 08 June 2020, dismissed the Carnapping charges, citing, among others, the voluntariness on the part of the drivers and conductors in parking their respective units at the Compound.”
That decision placed the whole bunch of lawyers under the authority of Leo Rey in big trouble – they failed to make their case. When that case was dismissed I wrote a quizzical column on how the Y2 could concoct such a plan when they know the buses were already in their control and not the Y4, and that the place where the buses were parked was a public and open space.
A carnapper does not display the vehicles he stole and with 55 buses of the same color, name and design could not be kept away from the public eye. Add the incident at the Ceres terminal and people will be watchful of those buses.
I wondered at the time how such a weak case could be filed. I thought Banibane did it on orders of Leo Rey and I considered it a knee-jerk reaction with poor legal advice. Now the wonder of it all is that the case was filed with the collaboration of several lawyers. Indeed even from a perspective of a non-lawyer, it was defective, how could it happen that a team of lawyers could make a collective mistake of so simple a case?
Two things could have happened. Leo Rey wanted to sue but his team of lawyers advised him they have a poor case. But Leo Rey, intent on consolidating his coup of the company, wanted to destroy his siblings, the main threat to his forcible takeover of the company. As strategists would say, the best defense is offense. By putting the Y4 on the defensive the Y2 and their mother probably thought they can clobber the Y4 into submission.
The other is that the lawyers told Leo Rey they should sue and win, a way to ingratiate themselves to the controlling power. Indeed a management change could mean a loss of income. Last weekend during a dinner, two lawyers were frank – all these cases against the Y4 means more money for the lawyers. Is it not a fact that without lawsuits, lawyering would be a poor investment? More so with a rich and tormented client.
And so that carnapping case was so weak it did not take long for the city prosecutor to dismiss it. The dead carnapping case must be revived with a motion for reconsideration and the only way to that is to make the witnesses sing the lawyers’ tune (the lie), by inducement (Leo Rey has millions to dispense) or by force. We will deal with this in length later on. The complaint continued.
“Obviously, hearing Complainants narrate the actual and true events and the reason for their respective personal and voluntary decision to park their units at the Compound, does not bode well for respondents and their principals.”
Thus “Respondent lawyers and/or their staff and upon hearing the actual and true recollection of the events of August 7, 2019 from Complainants, applied veiled threats and other compulsive tactics to pressure Complainants to change their story.”
That was an abominable thing for lawyers to do. But let’s take a break till December 28. Meantime, have a blissful Christmas!
Article Information
Comments (0)
LEAVE A REPLY
No comments yet
Be the first to share your thoughts!
Related Articles

Where students matter the most
There is a moment most teachers and student affairs people know too well, but rarely talk about. It is not during recognition day. Not during graduation. It is that quiet moment when you notice a student slowly fading — attendance slipping, participation shrinking, eyes no longer meeting yours. Nothing dramatic. No


