Naraja: AG can sue Finance’s Larson for salary increases under PL 19-83

Superior Court Presiding Judge Roberto C. Naraja ruled Wednesday last week that Attorney General Edward Manibusan has the authority to sue Finance Secretary Larrisa Larson over the salary increases that the Legislature had approved for some elected officials.

In denying Larson’s motion for summary judgment, Naraja said that Manibusan can sue Larson because Article 3 Section 11 of the NMI Constitution gives him the plenary authority to sue when there are violations of Commonwealth law.

“This case is ripe for adjudication because Manibusan’s suit alleges ongoing constitutional violations and it is extremely likely that [Public Law] 19-83 will be fully implemented,” said the judge in the 13-page order.

In November 2016, the Legislature passed Public Law 19-83, which instituted pay raises for civil service government employees, the governor, lieutenant governor, and members of the Legislature.

Gov. Ralph DLG Torres did not sign the bill into law but neither did he exercise his veto power. Instead, he allowed PL 19-83 to lapse into law.

Naraja said that Larson has a stake in this suit since she is the head of Finance.

Last Feb. 9, Manibusan sued Larson, claiming that she should be stopped from distributing any pay raises pursuant to PL 19-83.

Larson retained Kimberlyn K. King-Hinds and Matthew T. Gregory as her lawyers and filed a motion to disqualify and a motion for summary judgment.

Naraja recently issued an order denying Larson’s motion disqualify Manibusan and his office from continuing as counsel or a party to Manibusan’s lawsuit.

With respect to the motion for summary judgment, Larson, through counsel, argued that this case is not ripe for adjudication because PL 19-83 does not authorize her to disburse the allegedly unconstitutional pay raises.

Larson also raised issues such as whether she is a proper party and whether Manibusan is statutorily barred from bringing a claim against an executive agency, like Finance.

Manibusan, through counsel, argued that this case is ripe for adjudication because the allegedly impermissible pay raises will inevitably be implemented.

Manibusan also argued that his claims are purely legal challenges. As such, there is no need to wait for the actual application of the law for the court to rule on the question.

In his ruling on Wednesday, Naraja said the Legislature has signaled that it intends to pay out the raises by passing PL 19-83 in the first place.

“The proverbial guillotine has begun to drop and Manibusan need not wait for the blow to actually be struck,” Naraja said.

The judge pointed out that the mere fact that PL 19-83 has been passed into law is a potential constitutional injury. Even if there is no appropriation it is the current law of the Commonwealth.

Naraja said Manibusan can proactively seek to block the allegedly unconstitutional payments, which have already occurred as well as those that are soon to begin.

Naraja said Larson’s ripeness argument fails as a matter of law.

The judge said Larson’s argument that she is not a proper party fails because there is a clear connection between her role as Finance secretary and the alleged injury suffered by Manibusan.

Naraja rejected Larson’s argument that Manibusan cannot properly bring suit against her.

“Manibusan has plenary authority to bring suit alleging violations of Commonwealth law, whether the violation is civil or criminal in nature,” he said.

Naraja said in the circumstance that the AG brings suit against a department, by suing that department’s officer, the AG is obligated to ensure that competent counsel is appointed, which has occurred in this case.