The recusal of Sandiganbayan Associate Justice Karl Miranda was requested by ex-Senator Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr. in connection with the malversation case filed against him and six others over the alleged P92.8-million ghost flood control project in Pandi, Bulacan.

The former lawmaker’s camp filed an urgent motion before the Sandiganbayan Third Division, chaired by Miranda, citing that the justice is the brother of lawyer Buenaventura Miranda, counsel for former Department of Public Works and Highways Secretary Roberto Bernardo during the Senate flood control inquiry.

The former DPWH official has since been named a state witness, and Revilla’s camp said he could serve as a potential witness against the former senator.

Miranda, during Monday’s proceedings, addressed Revilla's motion, noting that he had disclosed his ties with his brother from the outset and that the Third Division did not specifically request the Revilla case.

“Following Sandiganbayan’s internal rules, the case was raffled among the seven divisions and it landed in our division. We did not ask that the case be given to us,” Miranda said.

The Sandiganbayan justice added that there is no basis for mandatory inhibition and emphasized his commitment to fulfilling his duties.

“That is clear. Fair is fair. Don’t twist. Under applicable rules, there is no ground for my mandatory inhibition. And that is the reason why I am sitting here. Because this is my duty,” Miranda said.

Miranda also said that personal ties have never influenced his judgment, adding he remains guided by the Sandiganbayan’s core values of honor, integrity, and accountability.

He said, “There is, however, a fourth, harder test: doing what is right despite all odds. And this is exactly what I intend to do.”

The motion for inhibition will be carefully studied and resolved as soon as possible to determine whether he should voluntarily inhibit, the justice said.

Ahead of Revilla’s motion, Miranda disclosed that he is friends with one of Revilla’s 11 legal counsels, Ramon Esguerra.

Lawyer Francesca Señga, Revilla’s spokesperson, said the motion has merit because the impartiality of justices is required both in fact and in appearance.

“If you recall, Usec. Bernardo testified in the Senate against Senator Revilla. The rules state that you should not only be impartial but also give the appearance of impartiality,” said the lawyer.

She asked, what does that mean? “You should also give people the impression that you are not taking sides.”

On the other hand, the prosecution panel said it would oppose Revilla’s motion, calling it a delaying tactic.

But this was disputed by Señga, saying Revilla is simply exercising his rights as an accused.

She said, “There are no delaying tactics, as we are following the proper process and using all that we can under the rights of the accused.”