spot_img
27.7 C
Philippines
Friday, March 29, 2024

Sereno camp hits witness’ ‘false claims’

- Advertisement -

THE camp of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno on Wednesday assailed lawyer Lorenzo Gadon for alleged another perjury in his impeachment charges against the former before the House of Representatives.

Sereno’s spokesman and lawyer Jojo Lacanilao stressed the claim of Gadon that Associate Justice Noel Tijam was the member-in-charge of the request of Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II for the transfer of Maute cases to Taguig City was proven to be false.

Lacanilao cited the testimony of Felipa Anama, SC clerk of court SC, that the administrative case was not raffled off to Justice Tijam. 

 “The Chief Justice is the Member-in-Charge for this administrative matter. The Chief Justice did not and could not have ‘caused the matter to be raffled [off] to her.’ The Chief Justice is not the head, and is not even a member of the Raffle Committee. She has no participation at all in the raffle of cases,” he stressed in denying Gadon’s claim.

- Advertisement -

In related developments:

• Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez on Wednesday said the hearings conducted by the House of Representatives’ committee on justice on the impeachment complaint against Sereno had slowly unraveled the flaws of her defense.

“We slowly see that the denials of the accusations against the Chief Justice were baseless,” Alvarez said a news conference. 

Alvarez said the documentary evidence and the testimonies of resource persons invited to impeachment proceedings would pose a problem for Sereno unless she appeared at the House justice committee to air her side and refute the charges against her. 

• A Supreme Court official admitted Wednesday that Sereno  took it upon herself to decide on the request of the Department of Justice to transfer jurisdiction of the cases involving Maute terrorists to either Luzon or Visayas from Mindanao.

At the impeachment proceeding of the House committee on justice, Supreme Court Clerk of Court Felipa Anama said Aguirre’s request letter on the matter was not raffled off to any member of the high court pursuant to the rules.

 “It’s [Aguirre’s request] with her [Sereno] since she already acted on it right from the start,” Anama told the hearing on the impeachment case filed against Sereno by Gadon.

Anama’s response came as  SAGIP party-list Rep. Rodante Marcoleta asked her if the case was raffled off or not.

Lacanilao also denied the allegation that Sereno was acting on the case by herself without the collegial approval of the high court.

“As the letter of the Secretary of Justice was personally addressed to her and considering the urgency of the matter, she discussed the matter with the [full Court] even prior to the matter being raffled [off]. Since the Supreme Court acted on the request, the raffle committee assigned the administrative matter to the Chief Justice consistent with the standard practice of the Clerk of Court,” the lawyer said.

 “The administrative matter was part of the raffle proceedings and although it was assigned to the Chief Justice, the assignment was confirmed by the members of the raffle committee composed of three justices of the Supreme Court,” he added.

Meanwhile, various media organizations have denounced the death threat received by Manila Times reporter Jomar Canlas, who testified in the House impeachment proceedings.

In separate statements, the Justice and Courts Reporters Association, Justice Reporters Organization and the National Press Club rallied behind Canlas against the harassment.

Jucra described the threats against Canlas an “act of cowardice and attack on our constitutionally enshrined freedom of the press.”

“We must never allow intimidation and harassment of journalists as we stand pat on our duty as a watchdog of democracy. We call on authorities to investigate the matter and run after the person/persons responsible for this dastardly criminal act,” the group said, in a statement.

The camp of Sereno joined Jucra’s call for investigation on the threat.

“The Chief Justice joins the call for concerned authorities to investigate the act of intimidation against Mr. Jomar Canlas, and ensure that he and other journalists are protected and are able to work without fear of reprisal,” it said.

 Juror also lamented the threat on Canlas, who is a member of the group, as a “direct attack on press freedom, which has no place in democracy.”

 “Journalists faithfully doing their job to keep the public well-informed, especially on matters pertaining to government affairs, should never be a target of attacks and intimidation. To renege on our responsibility in upholding the truth at all times is to betray our social contract with the people. To stifle that responsibility, in whatever manner, is a betrayal of truth itself,”  they said.

 NPC president Paul Gutierrez, for his part, said the Presidential Task Force on Media Security has assured the NPC that it was on top of Canlas’ case.

 “With the PTFOMS immediately taking over the case of Canlas as assured to me by Usec. Joel Sy Egco, it raised our optimism that no further harm can come to him and that those behind this cowardly act shall soon be unmasked,” Gutierrez said.

 The PTFOMS was created through Administrative Order on October 11, 2016. 

Members of the media may report threats to the task force, which will then monitor and, if necessary, provide assistance to journalists concerned.  

Canlas, a veteran print journalist, said he got two identical text messages on December 1, apparently telling him to say his last wishes to his wife and children. 

He already reported the matter to the Manila Police District, which vowed to investigate the matter and also offered to provide security to the journalist.

According to Alvarez, it would be a problem for Sereeno “if she fails to show up before the committee. Because based on rules, her absence would mean that all the denials they had submitted to the committee will be treated as a mere scrap of paper.” 

Earlier, Alvarez said the House would respect Sereno’s right and would not force her to attend the impeachment proceedings.

Alvarez said he did not mind if the committee would have to extend its hearings on the impeachment charges filed against Sereno by Gadon. 

He said the hearing had been getting evidence in support of the allegations against the Chief Justice.

“What is important to me is that the committee should be standing on firm ground if it decides to report out a finding endorsing the impeachment of Sereno and submit the required Articles of Impeachment,” Alvarez said.

In the previous hearings, Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo de Castro  testified that Sereno unilaterally altered a Temporary Restraining Order and issued one that was contrary to the recommendation of the assigned justice.

Court Administrator Midas Marquez said Tuesday Sereno’s creation of a committee and two technical working groups resulted in the delays in the release of benefits for surviving spouse of deceased judges by as many as two years.

Last May 29, Aguirre made the urgent request while the Supreme Court was still on recess.  

But Sereno assumed jurisdiction over the matter last June 6.

 Anama, a Sereno appointee, earned the ire of lawmakers for her seeming elusiveness in answering questions from them.  

She also invoked a “confidentiality rule” on administrative matters .

 Even the panel chairperson, Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali reprimanded Anama.  “Atty. Anama, huwag tayo maging pilosopo dito.”

 Anama said Aguirre’s request was supposed to be raffled off on June 19 but did not push through since it was already with Sereno.

“So it’s now clear that no actual raffle happened,” Marcoleta said.  

“Just because the Chief Justice assigned the matter to her, she already assumed jurisdiction. It was a plain assignment.”

In his complaint, Gadon accused Sereno of culpable violation of the Constitution for allegedly manipulating and delaying the resolution on Aguirre’s request to transfer the Maute terrorists’ cases outside of Mindanao.

Gadon alleged that Sereno “has been delaying the issuance and release of the Resolution because she failed to get a majority vote on her desire to keep the Maute and similar cases in Cagayan de Oro City, to the detriment of the service.”

Aguirre last week told Umali that “common sense would dictate that such an urgent matter requires a quick and decisive action.”

Anama also came to the defense of Sereno.  

She said the CJ assumed jurisdiction over the case pursuant to the Court’s internal rules, specifically Rule 7, Sec 6 (g) which provides that when the Court is in recess and urgency of matter requires immediate action, the Clerk of Court or the Division Clerk of Court will have to “personally transmit the rollo to the Chief Justice for his or her action.”

But Marcoleta said the rule could not be applied in the case since the Court was already in session when Sereno assumed jurisdiction over the request without the en banc’s approval.

- Advertisement -

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles