I support the arguments raised by the camp of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno for the upcoming deliberations in the En Banc session of the Supreme Court regarding the Quo Warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida.
The petition was submitted by SolGen Calida to seek the nullification of Sereno's appointment as Chief Justice following her failure to submit her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) which is a requirement of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).
The camp of the Chief Magistrate wants four Supreme Court magistrates, whom she accused of being biased against her, to inhibit themselves from hearing and deciding the quo warranto petition filed by the Office of the Solicitor General.
The four are Associate Justices Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza and Noel Tijam. All of them testified against the Chief Justice in her impeachment case pending before the House of Representatives and actively participated in the so-called “Red Monday” protest in the SC that called for her resignation.
In four separate motions filed with the high court, Sereno—through her lawyers led by Alexander Poblador—said her constitutional right to due process would be violated if the justices who publicly criticized her in the impeachment hearings and supported calls for her resignation are allowed to participate in the deliberation of the quo warranto case.
Sereno cited Article III, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution which says that “Due process of law requires a hearing before an impartial and disinterested tribunal, and that every litigant is entitled to nothing less than the cold neutrality of an impartial judge”
The side of the CJ Sereno called Justices Peralta, Jardeleza and Tijam for showing "actual bias" against her during the House impeachment proceedings. Meanwhile, Justice Bersamin has “exhibited bias and animosity” towards Sereno when he referred her leadership as of a "dictator".
Chief Justice Sereno also sought the compulsory disqualification of Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo De Castro from the quo warranto case for having “repeatedly manifested actual bias, if not personal animosity” towards the top magistrate.
Sereno stressed that Justice De Castro must inhibit herself pursuant to Section 5, Canon 3 of the New Code of Judicial Conduct, which “mandates the inhibition of a judge who is unable to decide the matter impartially or who may appear to a reasonable observer to be unable to decide a matter impartially” following her statement during the House impeachment hearing repeatedly stated under oath that the Chief Justice was disqualified by virtue of her non-submission to the JBC her SALN when she was a law professor at the University of the Philippines (UP).
If the justices has exhibited obvious resentments against CJ Sereno, then why should they be allowed to decide and be a part of the en banc session which seeks to disqualify her as a Chief Justice? And another thing: Sereno was appointed in 2012. Why they had been revealing these so-called irregularities and flaws of her selection and appoinment as the Judiciary's head today? Why they had only decided to say all of these things after 5 years?
Coming up to a conclusion, Calida's quo warranto petition and the impeachment proceedings thrown against Sereno is nothing but political in nature. They just want to overthrow the Chief Justice and appoint someone who can be an ally of the President as Duterte does not want CJ Sereno even from the very start. Besides that fact, the current administration cannot appoint a new Chief Magistrate as Sereno is set to retire in 2030 - a time when Duterte has reached his 6-year term in 2022.
That's why I call on everyone to unite and stand behind judicial independence and to our one and only Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno!
Comments