ON
🔍
← Back to feed
PHCulture8 days ago

CA junks Curlee Discaya’s ‘deficient’ appeal vs Senate arrest

The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed Pacifico 'Curlee' Discaya II's appeal against his detention by the Senate, ruling that his legal challenge was both procedurally and substantively flawed. The CA stated that Discaya should have pursued an appeal under Rule 41, Section 2(a), rather than the remedy he used. This upholds a previous decision by the Pasay Regional Trial Court (RTC) that found Discaya failed to prove the Senate committed grave abuse of discretion when citing him in contempt.

FROM ONE CELL TO ANOTHER Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya II waits to be transferred from the Senate to a Bulacan court, which ordered his arrest last week on charges of graft and malversation. Detained at the Senate since September, Discaya will now be held at the Bulacan provincial jail. —NIÑO JESUS ORBETA

The Court of Appeals (CA) has junked the petition filed by contractor Pacifico “Curlee” Discaya to reverse a trial court’s ruling that kept him under Senate custody for nearly nine months after being cited in contempt.

In a June 4 resolution, the CA’s Third Division denied the petition for certiorari by Discaya for “being procedurally defective and substantively deficient,” noting that it was the wrong legal remedy for the contractor.

Article continues after this advertisement

READ: Curlee Discaya leaves Senate for Bulacan jail

FEATURED STORIES

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

NEWSINFO

“Thus, the appropriate recourse of petitioner before the Court should have been through a notice of appeal under Rule 41, Sec. 2(a),” read the ruling, citing the provision for the filing of an ordinary appeal under the Rules of the Court.

This affirms the Feb. 23, 2026, decision and April 6 order of Branch 297 of the Pasay Regional Trial Court (RTC) that found Discaya’s failure to prove that the Senate committed grave abuse of discretion when he was cited in contempt by the chamber’s Blue Ribbon panel in September last year.

The committee was conducting an inquiry into the alleged corruption in infrastructure projects involving contractors who cornered contracts and secured kickbacks, purportedly including Discaya and his wife, Sarah.

Discaya was later held under the custody of the Senate for supposedly lying under oath when he explained the reason behind Sarah’s absence in the same hearing.

Article continues after this advertisement

Wrong remedy

To seek his release from detention, Discaya filed a petition for certiorari before the Pasay RTC, which was also dismissed. He then sought legal remedy from the appellate court.

But the CA pointed out that Discaya also failed to comply with requirements in filing the petition, such as attaching pertinent documents and serving a copy to the respondents, namely Pasay RTC Branch 297 Presiding Judge Ronald Tan, the Senate blue ribbon panel and Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano, then the Senate president.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Certiorari is an extraordinary, prerogative remedy and is never issued as a matter of right. Accordingly, the party who seeks to avail of it must strictly observe the rules laid down by law,” said the seven-page CA ruling written by Associate Justice Rogelio Largo.

Just last week, another court, a Malolos RTC, ordered the arrest of the Discaya couple and nine others for graft and malversation in connection with an allegedly irregular flood control project worth P53.9 million in Bulacan province.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.

Your subscription has been successful.

Discaya and two of his co-accused, both engineers of the Department of Public Works and Highways, are currently held at the Bulacan Provincial Jail.

Read the full article at Philippine Daily Inquirer →
Source document: Court of Appeals (CA)

1 reports

Philippine Daily InquirerIndependentCenter8 days ago
CA junks Curlee Discaya’s ‘deficient’ appeal vs Senate arrest

The Court of Appeals (CA) dismissed Pacifico 'Curlee' Discaya II's appeal against his detention by the Senate, ruling that his legal challenge was both procedurally and substantively flawed. The CA stated that Discaya should have pursued an appeal under Rule 41, Section 2(a), rather than the remedy he used. This upholds a previous decision by the Pasay Regional Trial Court (RTC) that found Discaya failed to prove the Senate committed grave abuse of discretion when citing him in contempt.

Bias read (Center): The article presents a factual summary of a legal proceeding without apparent ideological framing. It reports on the dismissal of an appeal based on procedural grounds, using neutral language and referencing legal rulings directly. There is no evident bias toward any political side, and the content,

Official sources cited

  • government Court of Appeals (CA)
  • government Pasay Regional Trial Court (RTC)

Go to the primary sources (2)

The official sources this coverage is built on. Read them directly to bypass framing.

  • governmentCourt of Appeals (CA)
  • governmentPasay Regional Trial Court (RTC)