STATEMENT ABOUT THE ORAL ARGUMENTS ON THE QUO WARRANTO PETITION AGAINST CHIEF JUSTICE SERENO

I am in the same stage with the Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno in the oral arguments on the quo warranto petition filed by the Solicitor General Jose Calida against her last Tuesday, April 10 at the Supreme Court Building in Baguio City.

The Chief Justice and her legal counsel, Atty. Alexander J. Poblador has been firm during the oral arguments that a quo warranto petition cannot be filed against any impeachable officials just like Sereno as the Constitution is clear that impeachable Officers can only be removed through impeachment. Art. XI, Section 2 provides: “The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.”

The Supreme Court in the oral arguments on the quo warranto petition against Chief Justice Sereno. Photo from the SC PIO.

The Sereno camp also warned the Supreme Court Justices that allowing the quo warranto case to prosper would set a dangerous precedent for breaches of constitutional procedure, judicial independence and separation of powers. Favoring the petition of SolGen Calida could create a negative impact on the public policy that preserves the independence of the judiciary and the separation of powers among the three co-equal branches of government.

CJ Sereno also maintained that she had met the specific qualification of proven integrity and complied with all the requirements of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) when she was being considered for the top judicial post in 2012. According to her, the mere fact that the JBC shortlisted her proved that its members, including then JBC ex-officio chair Supreme Court Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta, found her to have “substantially complied” with all the requirements, including the submission of Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs).

JBC records showed that Sereno submitted three SALNs, which she filed annually since she was appointed SC Associate Justice in 2010. The SALNs covered the years 2009, 2010 and 2011. Sereno was in private practice prior to her appointment to the high court.

The Chief Justice noted that the JBC had 11 chances to exclude her from the shortlist on the ground of her incomplete submission of SALNs, but it never did. Thus non-submission of SALNs to the JBC is not an integrity test as determined by the Constitution.

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno. Photo downloaded from the Supreme Court website.

Sereno and her team strongly rebuffed comparisons between her and the late Chief Justice Renato Corona pertaining to compliance with the law on the filing of Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN), saying she was never accused of having ill-gotten wealth.

Besides, upon questioning by Associate Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr., Solicitor General Jose Calida admitted during the oral arguments on the quo warranto case that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno met all the requirements per the 1987 Constitution to be appointed as top magistrate.

Section 7, Article VIII of the Constitution provides that “no person shall be appointed Member of the Supreme Court or any lower collegiate court unless he is a natural-born citizen of the Philippines. A Member of the Supreme Court must be at least 40 years of age, and must have been for 15 years or more a judge of a lower court or engaged in the practice of law in the Philippines.”

Since CJ Sereno has met the constitutional requirements, the Quo Warranto petition should be dismissed.

Associate Justice Teresita J. Leonardo-de Castro grilled the Chief Justice Sereno about the submission of SALNs but even Justice Leonardo-de Castro have 15 missing SALNs to the JBC but should have filed 37 SALNs.

The Supreme Court Justices who have appeared in the House Committee on Justice Impeachment Proceeedings who testified against CJ Sereno. Photos obtained from the SC website.

With these scenarios in the oral arguments, we can see that SolGen Calida filed a quo warranto petition due to the fact that Sereno's impeachment cannot stand in any impeachment court such as Senate.

That's why I stand with the Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno in the dismissal of the quo warranto petition in the highest court in the land.

Supreme Court Seal. Photo from Wikipedia Commons.