THE fate of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno will be known today (Friday) as the Supreme Court holds its special en banc session called primarily to resolve the quo warranto petition seeking her ouster as the country’s top magistrate.
Regardless of whether the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida against Sereno will prosper, the proceedings are considered historic for the judiciary, as this is the first time the qualification and validity of the appointment of a chief justice has been put to question.
Sereno, who went back to work after taking an indefinite leave starting March 1, will preside over the session that starts at 10 a.m.
While she is expected to preside over the deliberation of other cases on the agenda, she will be required to step out of the session when the other justices tackle the quo warranto case against her.
Court insiders said manyof the magistrates would be arriving at the SC onboard bullet-proof vehicles for the special session today.
Sources said a majority of at least nine justices are expected to vote to grant the quo warranto petition seeking to invalidate Sereno’s appointment as chief justice while at least three are expected to cast dissenting votes. Two magistrates have not yet submitted their positions, but can no longer affect the anticipated outcome.
Reports also indicated that the 150-page decision written by Associate Justice Noel Tijam would declare Sereno as “disqualified” as chief justice due to her ineligibility to hold the position and “guilty of unlawfully holding and exercising the Office of the Chief Justice.”
It would also declare the position of the chief justice vacant and direct the Judicial and Bar Council to start the selection process for a new Supreme Court chief.
The decision would also be immediately executory. Sereno could file a motion for reconsideration as provided by the Rules of Court, but would have to vacate her post while waiting for the Court to act on her appeal.
The ruling will be hinged on the requirement of proven integrity for positions in the Supreme Court as required in the 1987 Constitution, according to earlier reports that quoted court insiders.
After hearing the case in oral arguments last April 10, the majority of the justices supposedly found Sereno’s failure to file her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth as a clear indication of lack of integrity and dishonesty.
Sereno’s ineligibility supposedly could not be cured by her nomination and eventual appointment as chief justice during the previous administration.
The grant of the quo warranto petition against Sereno will render moot and academic the impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives. The House justice committee report for impeachment of Sereno is up for plenary debate when Congress resumes session next week.
While the justices will be deliberating inside the session hall, supporters of Sereno are set to gather outside the Supreme Court compound in Padre Faura St. for what they dubbed as “Jericho March for Justice.” Groups including Coalition For Justice and the organization Sanlakas will be joining the protest.
Judges and court employees, on the other hand, will hold a “Red Friday” rally to emphasize their call for Sereno’s removal as chief justice. Red ribbons have already been tied to the gates surrounding the Court compound.
Law deans and professors of various law schools in the country on Thursday urged the Supreme Court not to act on the quo warranto petition against Sereno, saying the only constitutionally accepted way of removing her from office is through conviction after the impeachment trial by the Senate.
In a manifesto titled “A Call for Adherence to Constitutional Process,” more than 130 law school deans and professors warned that removing Sereno through a quo warranto proceedings would undermine judicial independence as it could be used against any sitting magistrate.
“We the members of the law faculties, express our deep concern at the move to unseat the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court by means other than by impeachment,” the manifesto said adding that “it will expose those involved to the same vicious cycle of extrajudicial removal process which will subvert the constitutional check and balance and endanger judicial independence,” the manifesto stated.
The law deans and professors said that while they did not question the motivation and integrity of anyone involved in the process, the “integrity of the process is as important as its result.”
They said they have been taught in law schools that the only way to remove a sitting chief justice under the Constitution is through an impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction after trial by the Senate sitting as the impeachment court.
“Any other means would be unconstitutional,” the manifesto said, even as they asked the House of Representatives to immediately transmit to the articles of impeachment against Sereno to the Senate for trial.
They said the SC should allow the Senate to conduct the impeachment trial to give Sereno a chance to air her side in the allegations raised by lawyer Larry Gadon.
“Let the impeachment of the chief justice take its course as the Constitution dictates. Let the trial in the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court, begin. Allow the chief justice to defend herself in the impeachment trial,” they added.
Among those who signed the manifesto are former Court of Appeals Associate Justice and now dean of the Graduate School of Law of the Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila Hector Hofilena; former solicitor general Florin Hilbay; De La Salle College of Law Dean Jose Manuel Diokno; Lyceum College of Law Dean Maria Soledad Derequito-Mawis; Adamson College of Law Dean Anna Maria Abad; Far Eastern University Institute of Law Dean Melencio Sta. Maria; and Ateneo de Davao University College of Law Dean Manuel Quibod.
Also signing the manifesto were former UP College of Law dean Pacifico Agabin; former Ateneo School of Government dean Tony Laviña; PLM College of Law Dean Marisol Anenias; University of San Agustin College of Law Dean Jose Mari Tirol; and law deans and professors from law schools in the National Capital Region, and the cities of Baguio, Butuan, Cotabato and Davao.
Earlier, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, the national association of lawyers, asked the SC to allow them to intervene with a prayers for the dismissal of the quo warranto petition but the court en banc merely noted their plea.
In filing the petition, Calida said Sereno lacked moral integrity to be appointed to the top SC post considering that she failed to file all her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth as required by law.
Sereno’s alleged non-disclosure of all her wealth was also included in the impeachment complaint filed by Gadon.
The chairman of the House committee on justice, meanwhile, said the chamber is all set to transmit the articles of impeachment against Sereno to the Senate for a full-blown trial if the Supreme Court rules against the quo warranto petition. With PNA
“We are ready. We have voted to impeach Sereno at the committee level. I do not expect a different result at the plenary,” Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali, chairman of the House committee on justice, said.
Umali made the statement as the Court prepared to hand down its decision on the quo warranto petition filed against Sereno by Calida.
Umali said the House will approve in plenary session the articles of impeachment against Sereno when Congress resumes session beginning May 15.
Before Congress adjourned March 21, the committee on rules referred the matter for plenary consideration. Congress will resume session on May 15.
Voting 33-1, the House committee on justice on March 19 endorsed for plenary approval its report to impeach Sereno.
Only Quezon City Rep. Christopher Belmonte opposed the motion of Leyte Rep. Vicente Veloso to approve the 45-page committee report and the 56-page articles of impeachment against Sereno.
Still, Umali said he expects the Supreme Court to render an “overwhelming” vote to unseat Sereno, an appointee of then President Benigno Aquino III.
The Supreme Court Employees Association on Thursday as it called on members to wear red from Thursday until Friday.
“Turn the Supreme Court and Padre Faura red on Friday, May 11, 2018. Show our unity against falsehood and the destruction of our beloved institution–the high court. Pray that the decision of our magistrates would be aligned with the truth and welfare of the Supreme Court, the judiciary and the Filipino people,” the SCEA said in a statement in Filipino released Thursday.
On Thursday, red ribbons were tied at the SC compound’s gates while some employees wore red.
During Monday’s flag ceremony, SC officials and employees also donned red clothes to reiterate their call for Sereno to resign.
Philippine Judges Association president Judge Felix Reyes and SC Employees Association president Erwin Ocson were spotted wearing red.
“This is to show our collective action to show the truth and pursue reform in the Supreme Court and the judiciary,” the group said.
The organizations cited “demoralization” among their ranks, noting that the impeachment proceedings against Sereno had placed the “entire judiciary in disrepute, thereby affecting the honor and integrity” of the magistrates and judges.
Both PJA and SCEA earlier issued a joint manifesto calling for the resignation of Sereno “to give the entire judiciary the opportunity to move forward and get back to order.”
If found guilty, Sereno would be the first Chief Justice to be removed from office through quo warranto proceedings.
A spokesman for Sereno said they would file a motion for reconsideration if the Court rules in favor of the petition.