The biggest plot twist of 2018 in the Supreme Court came in the middle of the year—the ouster of sitting Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno.
Following a tension-filled oral argument during the high court’s summer session in Baguio City last April that was opened to the public, what was said to be an “ordinary shouting match” between Sereno and her nemesis, Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, led to the 15-member bench voting 8-6 to remove Sereno from her post by granting the quo warranto petition filed by the Solicitor General last May.
The quo warranto decision preempted the impeachment proceedings against Sereno before the House of Representatives, where five fellow magistrates—De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza and Noel Tijam—testified against the top magistrate.
The impeachment hearings, as well as the ouster of Sereno, had confirmed rumblings during her six-year tenure as chief justice that many of her colleagues didn’t like her.
What was supposed to be a record 18-year-term in the top judicial post was cut short after a majority of her colleagues in the high court decided to remove Sereno and annul her appointment in 2012 by then-President Benigno Simeon Aquino III.
In June, the Court voted 8-6 to deny Sereno’s appeal and rule with finality that her appointment by Aquino was invalid because she was not qualified for the post due to lack of proven integrity, which was a key constitutional requirement.
The high court ruling cited Sereno’s failure to submit all required Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth when she was teaching law at the University of the Philippines and during her application for the post, effectively reversing the finding of the Judicial and Bar Council when it shortlisted her for the post.
The JBC had required submission of at least 10 SALNs, but Sereno only submitted three—for 1998, 2002 and 2006—yet still made it to the shortlist and was later appointed by Aquino.
The High Tribunal held that Sereno may be removed via quo warranto proceedings since it is “separate and distinct from impeachment.”
The majority vote was composed of Associate Justices De Castro, Peralta, Bersamin, Jardeleza, Tijam, Samuel Martires, Andres Reyes Jr. and Alexander Gesmundo.
The six magistrates who dissented from the ruling were Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Mariano Del Castillo, Estela Bernabe, Marvic Leonen and Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa.
The justices also ordered an administrative case against Sereno for violations of the Code of Professional Responsibility and Code of Judicial Conduct “for transgressing the sub judice rule and for casting aspersions and ill motives to the members of the Supreme Court.”
Apparently unsatisfied with her answers as to why she attacked the justices before her media and public appearances during the pendency of the case, the Court initiated the administrative proceedings against Sereno and later unanimously decided to cite her in contempt, penalizing her with a “reprimand” and a warning of harsher punishment upon repetition of her violations.
The SALN controversy was not the only issue hurled against Sereno. She was likewise accused of enjoying lavish benefits for government officials, including the use of first-class flights and hotel accommodations in her official trips and use of a brand new P5-million Land Cruiser as a service vehicle.
Sereno was also accused of delayed appointments in key judicial positions, supposedly to reserve them for her staff.
Personal grudges
Sereno’s term as Chief Justice witnessed not just differences in her opinions with other justices but also personal grudges with some of them.
De Castro had criticized Sereno for making unilateral decisions on several administrative matters and disrespecting the collegial nature of the Court.
During the hearings on the impeachment case against Sereno filed by lawyer Larry Gadon, De Castro revealed that Sereno unilaterally created an office in the judiciary—an act tantamount to the usurpation of Congress’ legislative power and a clear disregard for the decision of her colleagues in the court.
De Castro said she was “taken aback” when Sereno invited her and the other justices in November 2012—just a few months after her appointment as Chief Justice in August that year—and “made it appear” the judiciary was reviving the Regional Court Administrative Office.
De Castro said she discovered that Sereno had actually created a Judiciary Decentralized Office in Region 7, which was “not sanctioned” at all by the full Court, unlike the RCAO, which has a complete set of officers.
De Castro learned from the now-retired clerk of court Enriqueta Vidal that Sereno “misled” her staff into declaring to her categorically that the 15 justices “ratified” her administrative order creating RCAO, when in fact no ratification had taken place.
On another impeachment charge, De Castro also bared Sereno’s “falsification” of a temporary restraining order that could have benefited more party-list groups other than the senior citizens' party.
De Castro recalled an instance when she recommended a TRO for disqualification of 14 party-list groups, but Sereno increased the coverage to 53 groups and also expanded the order’s tenor to include directing the Commission on Elections to “stop proclaiming all party-list groups” instead of just one – for senior citizens.
Sereno, for her part, claimed that De Castro’s testimonies were ill-motivated, as she recalled how the senior magistrate told her she would never forgive her for accepting the chief justice post in 2012 and bypassing all senior justices.
De Castro stressed that seniority is very important in the appointment of chief justice, who needs to have ascendancy over the other justices.
Sereno also had a conflict with Jardeleza after she blocked his nomination for a position in the SC. As chair of the Judicial and Bar Council, she moved for the disqualification of Jardeleza.
However, the former Solicitor General sought relief from the SC. Sereno’s colleagues reversed the JBC’s decision and ordered Jardeleza’s inclusion in the shortlist, which eventually led to his appointment to the High Court.
Back to normal
Upon Sereno’s ouster, De Castro was named chief justice by President Rodrigo Duterte. Unlike Sereno, who was a junior magistrate when appointed by Aquino in 2012, De Castro was the most senior of the justices nominated for the post.
Even justices admitted the appointment of De Castro brought the Court “back to normal” with the seniority in judiciary again respected in the appointment of the chief justice.
“Seniority is important because who is senior will have vast experience as to the workings of the court. It is expected that the senior members will have respect of the rest of the members of the court,” De Castro stressed.
When she assumed her post as chief justice last Aug. 28, De Castro said she wanted her brief leadership in the judicial branch to be remembered as the one “that restored collegiality in the Supreme Court” and “which was able to institute several reforms in the judicial processes.”
Although De Castro made history as the shortest serving CJ—with a tenure of just 46 days—she was able to implement key programs and reforms in the judiciary.
Vacancies in key administrative positions in the Court have finally been filled after long delay in appointments.
Among the key appointments in the judiciary during De Castro’s tenure were Davao City regional trial court Judge Leo Madrazo as deputy court administrator for Mindanao, a position that was vacant for over one year or since July 2017; lawyer Ma. Carina Cunanan as SC deputy clerk of court and chief administrative officer, a position that had also been vacant since December 2017; and lawyer Librada Buena as new SC first division clerk of court in place of clerk of court Felipa Anama, who retired from the judiciary earlier this year.
De Castro also led the Court in increasing the salary of first-level court judges all over the country, in one of the several judicial reforms implemented under her brief term.
The Court ordered the implementation of its administrative order that increased the salary grade of judges in municipal trial courts, municipal circuit trial courts, municipal trial courts in cities and shari’a circuit courts.
From salary grade 26 and 27, the judges in lower courts will now be increased to grade 28 through a resolution issued by the high court last Sept. 11.
De Castro retired last October 10, leaving the chief justice post vacant for the second time this year.
Bersamin’s turn
Bersamin, the third most senior among the nominees, was then appointed by President Duterte as De Castro’s successor.
Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, the most senior magistrate nominated for the chief justice post, was bypassed for the third time, following the appointments of the late Renato Corona and Sereno.
Bersamin branded himself as “accidental chief justice,” recognizing that he is not the most senior among the justices and many court personnel were expecting Carpio to be appointed as chief justice.
He cited his 32 years of experience in the judiciary, making him the most senior of the current justices in terms of service and tenure in the judiciary.
Bersamin, who will sit 11 months in the top judicial post before retiring in October next year, asked for the cooperation of court officials and personnel, as he vowed to pursue reforms in the judiciary.
The Chief Justice said he wants to push through with the proposed revision of the Rules of Court aimed at speeding up the resolution of cases and easing the court dockets.
Bersamin said he also plans to bring the wheels of justice closer to the people by tapping law schools and law students to assist the poor in gaining access to legal remedies.
Lastly, he vowed to ensure that lower courts will also benefit from reform programs.
Bersamin likewise brought back a familiar face—Court Administrator Midas Marquez—as spokesman of the high court, the same position he during the terms of Corona and retired chief justice Reynato Puno.
Marquez replaced Atty. Theodore Te, who had resigned shortly after Sereno’s ouster.
Carpio bypassed
The Palace later explained that Carpio was not picked by the President because of his earlier decision not to apply for the chief justice post, in deference to his position against the ouster of Sereno.
Carpio said he did not want to benefit from Sereno’s ouster, which he had voted against, but decided to apply for the post after De Castro’s retirement because he believed that the vacancy was no longer questionable.
But Presidential Spokesman Salvador Panelo rebutted Carpio’s explanation, arguing the vacancy from De Castro’s retirement also stemmed from Sereno’s ouster.
Court observers, however, believed that Carpio’s stance against Duterte’s policy in the territorial dispute with China in the West Philippine Sea doomed his chances to be appointed chief justice.
Carpio said he would accept being bypassed anew due to his vocal position on the issue.
“The President has the prerogative to appoint whoever he wants and I will respect that. But that will not stop me from continuing my advocacy because for me this is more important than anything else,” he stressed.
Earlier, Carpio has actively called on the Duterte administration to file new protests against China before the Permanent Court of Arbitration over the harassment of Filipino fishermen by Chinese Coast Guards in the Scarborough Shoal off Zambales province.
He suggested that the Philippine government should seek damages from China for violation of the PCA ruling in 2016 that favored the Philippines’ claim on the shoal, including its lagoon.
More recently, Carpio expressed opposition to the plan for joint exploration and exploitation with China in the waterway, saying it would violate the Constitution.
He stressed that “joint exploration and exploitation” as defined in the law “will diminish our ‘full control’ and thus violate the Constitution.”
The latest vacancy was Carpio’s last chance to be chief justice since he is retiring in the same month as Bersamin.