‘Lawsuit vs. Brown not a personal attack’

Former Senate president Juan S. Demapan said Friday that attorney general Pamela Brown had made a settlement offer in connection with the Malite case, denying accusations that the lawsuit he has initiated to unseat her from her government post was motivated by vindictiveness.

Demapan disclosed this in a document submitted to the Superior Court, denying Brown’s allegation that the lawsuit was a personal, vindictive attack on her after she blocked the payment of some $3.45 million in land compensation claim to the Malite estate through a separate lawsuit.

“There is evidence identified as ‘Confidential Settlement Negotiations’ that purports to suggest that defendant wanted settlement of the Malite lawsuit,” said Demapan’s attorney, Antonio M. Atalig.

Brown’s attorneys have accused Demapan and his former counsel, the late Pedro M. Atalig, of retaliation, disclosing that the latter had offered to drop the suit against the attorney general if she, in turn, dismisses the Malite case so that payment of the $3.45 million to the estate could proceed.

But Antonio Atalig said that the offer was simply a good faith attempt to find common grounds for settlement.

“Unfortunately, rather than settle for peace, defendant wants protracted litigation,” he said. “The taxpayer’s lawsuit is not vindictive litigation; it was based on good faith effort to correct what we believe to be violation of Commonwealth law with respect to the Senate confirmation.”

Atalig said the court should deny Brown’s request for summary judgment, saying that disputes on material facts exist while the parties differ in the interpretation of law in various aspects of the confirmation process that installed her as permanent attorney general.

Atalig contends that Brown’s confirmation deadline fell on Sept. 14, 2003 following the latter’s nomination by Gov. Juan N. Babauta on June 16, 2003 as attorney general; Brown’s camp contends that the deadline had not lapsed when she was confirmed on Nov. 17, 2003.

“When the governor makes his appointment under Article III [of the Constitution], the persons appointed take or hold their office and assumes all the powers of that office until such time that the Senate reject the appointment,” Atalig said, citing an excerpt from a precedent decision by the CNMI Supreme Court.

Brown contends that the 90-day deadline did not apply to her, since she did not assume the attorney general post in an acting capacity until the Senate confirmed her.

Atalig also questioned the validity of Brown’s confirmation, saying that two of the five Senate votes, which were favorably made by senators Paterno Hocog and Joseph Mendiola, were invalid. He said the two senators could not vote because they could only assume office on the second Monday of January 2004.

Brown’s lawyers said that the constitutional provision requiring that elected officers take office on the second Monday of January following a regular general election does not apply to the case of Hocog and Mendiola, who were both elected in special elections.

They have also accused Demapan and Atalig of having financial interest in the Malite estate.

Demapan had earlier mellowed down in his lawsuit against Brown, amending his complaint to exclude his request to compel her to repay the salaries she received from the government as its chief attorney. He had filed the first amended complaint to include Finance Secretary Fermin Atalig in the suit. In the first and second amended versions of the complaint, Demapan sued Brown and Atalig in their official capacities only.

He wants the court to declare that the CNMI government, through Atalig, has been continuously paying Brown salary and expenses as attorney general, which he claims to be 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.