Previous Story
Demapan mellows down in suit vs Brown
|
Posted on Mar 16 2005
Former Senate president Juan S. Demapan eased up on his lawsuit against attorney general Pamela Brown, removing his request to compel her to repay the salaries she received from the government as its chief attorney.
Demapan still maintains, though, that Brown has been holding the position of attorney general unlawfully.
Demapan filed with the Superior Court yesterday his second amended complaint—more than three months after he first filed the suit to prevent Brown from holding the attorney general post further. He had filed the first amended complaint to include Finance Secretary Fermin Atalig in the suit.
Demapan wants the court to declare that the CNMI government’s continuous payment of Brown’s salary and expenses through Atalig is an unlawful expenditure of public funds.
Demapan also asked the court to permanently prohibit Atalig from paying Brown the salary and expenses of an attorney general—whether in official or acting capacity.
In yesterday’s second amended complaint, Demapan excluded his earlier request for a court order directing Brown to repay government funds she received in the form of salary and expenses as attorney general.
Lawyer Antonio M. Atalig replaced the late Justice Pedro M. Atalig as lawyer for Demapan in the case. The former justice passed away sometime last month.
Demapan filed the taxpayer’s lawsuit, contending that the government has been improperly spending for the salary and expenses of Brown as attorney general since June 16, 2003, the date when Gov. Juan N. Babauta nominated her to the post.
Brown claims that she only assumed the position after being sworn into office on Dec. 5, 2003, and denied assuming the post in an acting capacity.
Demapan’s suit is based on what he insists is the questionable validity of Brown’s confirmation by the Senate on Nov. 17, 2003.
The suit alleged that Brown failed to muster the constitutional requirement for confirmation within the 90-day deadline following her appointment. It claimed the 90-day deadline for Brown’s confirmation fell on Sept. 14, 2003, when the Senate had yet to act on her nomination. A Senate faction composed of four members also rejected Brown’s nomination in a session on Sept. 17, 2003.
