CHIEF Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno on Sunday questioned the decision of the Supreme Court to hold a special en banc session primarily to resolve the quo warranto petition filed against her by Solicitor General Jose Calida seeking to nullify her appointment as the country’s top magistrate.
Sereno said she is puzzled why her colleagues would opt to decide on the quo warranto case during the Court’s decision-writing break.
“The month of May is a time that is supposed to be devoted to writing decisions in the many pending cases before the Court. Anyway the session will resume on June 5, so what’s with the rush?” Sereno said in press conference over the week.
Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio has confirmed that the Court is set to resolve the case next month. Insiders said the justices will hold a special session on May 17 during their month-long recess to decide on Sereno’s fate.
Sereno, who has been on indefinite leave fsince March 1, also expressed concerns over information that there was already a draft decision of the Court, as reported by some media outlets, even before parties submitted their memoranda on the case last Friday.
She said this could be proof that her colleagues have already decided on the case even before hearing her side fully.
Sereno’s spokesperson, lawyer Josa Deinla, said the reported draft decision penned by Associate Justice Noel Tijam is not really surprising.
“The justice (Tijam) has exhibited manifest bias and prejudice against the chief justice and even refused to recuse himself from the proceedings,” she said.
Tijam and four other magistrates – Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin and Francis Jardeleza – were asked by Sereno to inhibit themselves from the case after they testified in the earlier impeachment hearings in the House of Representatives and supposedly demonstrated their biases against her. But all five rejected the plea for reasons to be explained in their opinions to be submitted upon deliberation on the case.
Some news organizations reported on a leaked draft decision by Tijam, which supposedly grants the petition and orders the immediate removal of Sereno as chief justice due to invalid appointment in 2012.
Other court observers, however, said news or the draft decision was premature and could unduly influence public opinion against Sereno.
Should the Court manage to resolve the quo warranto petition next month, it would render the impeachment complaint against Sereno moot.
On Sunday, the Sereno camp denied insinuations that the chief justice had a hand in the filing of a disbarment complaint against lawyer Larry Gadon, who filed the impeachment case against Sereno.
“We only just heard that disbarment complaint and the letter requesting the Solicitor General to file (the quo warranto case) against Associate Justice De Castro,” Deinla said over radio dzBB.
Deinla said they have done nothing
The third disbarment complaint against Gadon was grounded on the allegation that he cursed at Sereno’s supporters in Baguio City. The second and third disbarment cases against him stemmed from his alleged hateful remarks against Muslims in 2016, and for supposedly making perjurious statements and harassing court employees in relation to his bid to oust Sereno from power.
The complaints were filed by Zena Bernardo, Nona Andaya-Castillo, Natividad Dela Cruz Natividad, Jose Mari Tomines Callueng, Jennifer Aiza Santaolaya, Evangeline Hernandez, Faith Angelie Catalan, and Mark Vincent Lim.
On Friday, a Sereno supporter — Jocelyn Maria Acosta — urged Solicitor General Jose Calida to initiate quo warranto proceedings against De Castro “lacking integrity as a member of the Supreme Court.”