Taguig City’s mayoralty candidate and former Associate Justice Dante O. Tiñga yesterday dismissed attempts by political opponents to besmirch his name, by making an issue out of decisions he had penned in the Supreme Court.

Justice Tiñga, a three-term Representative of the Taguig-Pateros district said his opponents are becoming restless as the May 10 election nears.

“In their desperation, they seek to make me account for my official acts in the Supreme Court (SC), obviously either unmindful or ignorant of the rule that the Supreme Court justice, even in retirement, cannot be held liable court decisions. That is why the Ombudsman will have to eventually dismiss the case.”

Reports came out in several tabloids about the filing of a certain Engr. Ernesto Baustista of a plunder case before the Office of the Ombudsman against Tiñga regarding SC decision and resolution penned by the former justice way back in 2004 and 2006.

Tiñga said the timing of these stories is highly suspect, considering that the decisions have been made final and executory years ago. Both the 2004 and 2006 cases were raffled off and both landed on Tiñga’s division.  

“They are becoming increasingly desperate to get the attention of Taguig voters. But instead of presenting solid platform of governance, they are resorting to dirty politicking and black propaganda by coming out with baseless accusations and malicious stories against me,” Tinga said.

Moreover, Tiñga said he had received reports that publications containing false stories are being distributed to the Taguig constituents, allegedly by his political opponents. “Our political opponents in Taguig are so used to such kind of dirty politics for lack of performance,” he stressed.


In 2004, the SC ruled in favor of FUCC, awarding the firm P74-million plus legal interest representing the just compensation for its blasting works for Napocor.  This decision, written by Tiñga and concurred by Chief Justice Reynato Puno, Associate Justices Austria-Martinez, Callejo, Sr., and Chico-Nazario became final and executory on January 4, 2005.

When the case was remanded to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City for execution in favor of FUCC, the RTC however issued a writ of execution in favor of Dynamic Blasting Specialist of the Philippines (DBSP), a subcontractor of FUCC.

A legal battle ensued between FUCC and DBSP.  On FUCC’s appeal, the Court of Appeals (CA) upheld RTC decision.  FUCC elevated the case to the SC and the appeal was raffled again to Justice Tinga.  

In 2006, the SC upheld its 2004 decision in favor of FUCC through a resolution penned by Tiñga and concurred in by Associate Justices Leonardo Quisumbing, Antonio Carpio, Conchita Carpio Morales, Presbitero Velasco, Jr.

In the resolution, the SC nullified the RTC’s writ of execution and the CA’s decision. The SC held that the courts below should have abided by its 2004 decision and status quo order. It added that DBSP should have intervened in the main case before the promulgation of the 2004 decision in the case or should have filed a separate case against FUCC.

With this decision, Bautista maliciously accused Tiñga, officials of NAPOCOR, Land Bank of the Philippines and First United Constructors Corporation (FUCC) of pocketing P93-M from NAPOCOR although its claim against FUCC was for P37million only.

But the law provides that an SC justice cannot be sued or held liable for his/her court decisions.

“These black propagandas have maliciously cast a negative image not only on my person but the judiciary as well. I call on our opponents to use their influence for the good of Taguig and its people, rather than using their resources in political mudslinging,” Tiñga said.