De Castro: Sereno should’ve consulted me about party-list case

MANILA, Philippines — Associate Justice Teresita De Castro said that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno should have consulted her before issuing a “blanket” temporary restraining order on party-list proclamations during the 2013 polls.

De Castro testified before the House justice committee Tuesday to shed light on the accusation that Sereno “tampered and altered” the content of the draft TRO sent by the associate justice, who was the member-in-charge of the petition filed by the disqualified Coalition of Association of Senior Citizens party-list.

She called Sereno’s actions “grossly unprocedural” because the chief magistrate involved party-lists that were not involved in the case.

De Castro recommended the issuance of a TRO against the Commission on Elections to refrain it from implementing its resolution nullifying the party-list from participating in the elections.

“The TRO should only be directed to the Coalition of Association of Senior Citizens party-list. It is very basic that you cannot include anyone who is not involved in the case because that would violate the right of the other party-lists to due process and would violate the right of their constituencies,” she stressed.

“I, as a member-in-charge, should have been consulted by the chief. We could have threshed out our differences if only she talked with me,” De Castro said.

She also admitted that she was “taken aback” because she was attributed to having recommended the TRO.

“What I did not like about this TRO is that I was alluded to as the one who recommended,” De Castro said.

She added: “So I wrote a letter that you altered my recommendation. Why did you do that? She did not even call me up to discuss.”

READ: Point by point: Sereno answers impeachment complaint

In her verified answer to lawyer Larry Gadon’s complaint, Sereno said that she could not be accused of falsifying anything.

“Since Justice De Castro was merely ‘recommending’ a course of action to the Chief Justice and further considering that the proposed ‘temporary restraining order’ was merely a ‘draft,’ the Chief Justice can wholly accept, modify or even reject Justice De Castro’s recommendation,” it read.

Sereno’s camp also argued that she was within her power to issue a TRO because the petition was filed during recess. Under Section 6, Rule 7 of the SC Internal Rules, "when the Court in recess and the urgency of the case requires immediate action, the Clerk of Court or the Division Clerk of Court shall personally transmit the rollo to the Chief Justice or the Division Chairperson for his or her action."

But the SC issued a status quo ante order which applied De Castro’s recommendations. 

RELATED: De Castro: My testimony is not ruled by emotions