Friday’s landmark decision of the Supreme Court ousting its head, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, for “unlawfully holding and exercising the office of the Chief Justice” is cause for jubilation for some quarters and indignation to others.
For the entire nation, however, it is a harbinger of uncertainty and dark times ahead.
Eight justices voted to oust Sereno while six voted against the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida. The petition highlighted Sereno’s failure to submit a complete set of Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth—a basic requirement for nominees to the post.
Sereno herself tried to put a positive spin to her dismissal, thanking her supporters and urging them to continue the fight against oppressive forces.
“As long as we stand for what is right, we will never lose,” she said.
Former President Benigno Aquino III likened the case to a mango in varying stages of ripeness as he insisted that an official like Sereno can only be removed through impeachment. Vice President Leni Robredo said the day everyone had been dreading had arrived.
But no less than President Rodrigo Duterte has declared Sereno an enemy, vowing in April that he would personally make sure she is removed from office. “She is bad for the Philippines,” the President said, reacting to Sereno’s assertion that he was behind the attempts to oust her.
The Supreme Court’s decisions has made the post of chief justice vacant, but it does not get rid of doubts on how the country can proceed after the highly divisive and emotional ruling.
How can we disabuse the public that the associate justices voted the way they did because of their personal loyalties, instead of their convictions and sense of justice?
How can we throw out the simplistic thinking that every issue can be reduced to a battle of personalities instead of the legitimate legal questions that must be resolved?
How can we put to rest the questions on the validity of rulings, especially close ones where Sereno’s vote could have decided, or helped decide, the case?
Finally, how can the Duterte administration dispel fears that this is part of a bigger attempt to control all branches of government and silence its critics?
The Supreme Court as an institution has decided, and Filipinos must respect the decision whether or not they agree with it. A more daunting task lies ahead, however, for these supposedly erudite individuals, and for the heads of the other branches of government: To reassure all Filipinos of all political persuasions that justice reigns supreme despite these—we hope, temporarily—turbulent times.
