"x x x.
Red flag: 3 TROs
Something strange, however, happened on the way to this decision. Velasco issued 3 versions of a TRO stopping the BCDA from proceeding with the public bidding. All of these were dated on the same day, January 9, 2013, and received by the BCDA on 3 separate days. We obtained copies of these TROs.
The first version directed the BCDA to carry out the TRO…”until further orders from the Court.” BCDA received this on January 9, 2013.
The next day, another TRO was sent to BCDA, sounding more urgent. It added a new phrase, “effective immediately” and retaining “until further orders from this court.” This time, the process server asked the BCDA if he could pull out the documents he had given them the previous day. In its motion for reconsideration (MR), the BCDA narrated that it refused, finding the whole thing “curious.”
That was not the end of it. On January 11, 2013, a 3rd and final version of the TRO reached the BCDA. It was practically the same as the second version.
“The ruse attempted by the Process Server, coupled with the several variants of the same order, give Respondents cause for concern,” the BCDA said. “…the Process Server’s bid to recall the original order that was served is stealthy and highly irregular, a subterfuge unbecoming of such an august institution.”
We asked lawyers if the issuance of multiple versions of a TRO is common. They say this is unusual, a rarity in the annals of the Philippine Supreme Court.
x x x."
