‘Solicitor general case vs Sereno an assault on Senate’

MANILA, Philippines — The petition for quo warranto filed against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno is “an assault against the Senate’s integrity and democratic processes,” Sen. Risa Hontiveros warned yesterday.

Vice President Leni Robredo and Sereno’s lawyers and supporters also warned that the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida seeking the nullification of Sereno’s appointment is against the 1987 Constitution and the impeachment process.

Hontiveros said the petition filed by Calida could set a dangerous precedent where the Senate is relegated to the political sidelines.

“It is part of a greater scheme to render the Senate obsolete and irrelevant, when it is one of the few institutions left where the government’s abuses can still be checked,” Hontiveros said. 

“Just imagine: if the executive can impeach a Supreme Court chief justice without the Senate, it can also

change the Constitution without it. It is no secret that this government is adamant in changing the Constitution even without the participation of the Senate,” she warned. 

She said in filing the petition, Malacañang seems to question the capacity of the Senate to conduct a fair and impartial impeachment trial.

“The Constitution is clear. The best way to hold accountable and remove impeachable high-ranking government officials is through the process of impeachment where the Senate is convened as an impeachment court,” she said.

Robredo also expressed alarm over Calida’s filing of a quo warranto appeal before the SC.

“This is alarming because it’s clear in the Constitution that the only way to remove a Supreme Court justice is through impeachment,” Robredo said yesterday during the inauguration of a private sector-funded transitional village in Barangay Sagonsongan for families displaced by the Marawi siege last year.

The Vice President noted that Calida’s petition came as “an impeachment proceeding is already underway.”

“To think of another way to remove her (Sereno) violates the Constitution,” said Robredo, who is a lawyer.

“This is illegal under the Constitution, because the only way to remove them from office is through impeachment,” she added.

She cited the SC’s ruling on the disbarment cases against former chief justice Marcelo Fernan as well as former deputy ombudsman Emilio Gonzales III.

One of Sereno’s lawyers, Anacleto Lacanilao III, said opponents of the Chief Justice pushing for her ouster should bring the battle to the Senate, which will sit as an impeachment court, instead of a quo warranto proceeding, which he said is against the provisions of the 1987 Constitution.

Calida on Monday asked the SC to void Sereno’s appointment due to her alleged failure to fully disclose her wealth.

Under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court, a quo warranto proceeding is an action by the government against an individual who “usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, position or franchise.”

According to Calida’s petition, Sereno failed to declare her wealth in full during 17 years out of her 28-year teaching stint at the University of the Philippines College of Law.

Expired

Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman invoked a 1926 jurisprudence that can doom the petition of Calida.

Lagman, an opposition lawmaker, said that the quo warranto petition filed by Calida will be thrown out by the 14 justices on the basis that the suit’s one-year prescriptive period, which should have been in 2013, has long expired. 

“As early as in the case of Agcaoili vs. Suguitan on Feb. 13, 1926, the SC has debunked the plea of the government that the statute of limitation cannot be invoked against the State in quo warranto proceedings,” he said in a statement.

Lagman described as a “joke” Calida’s argument that it is only now that the government learned that Sereno was ineligible to become a nominee for chief justice in 2012 due to her failure to substantially comply with the 10-year rule on the submission of statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).

“This is a convenient ruse to avoid the inevitable that the filing of the subject quo warranto petition against Sereno has long expired under the Rules of Court,” he said. 

“It is on record that Sereno asked the Judicial and Bar Council to excuse her from producing her prior SALNs, and the JBC proceeded to include her in the shortlist of nominees for appointment as chief justice,” he added.

Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan) and supporters of Sereno led by the Coalition of Justice yesterday held a protest rally at the House of Representatives in Quezon City.

They said Calida’s quo warranto petition is a desperate move by the Duterte regime to unseat Sereno.

“If the Supreme Court gives due course to the petition, it will set a very bad precedent. Such proceedings can and will be used against other justices of the SC in the future… No one is safe from being removed. It also makes a mockery of the so-called checks and balance in government, including the impeachment process itself,” stressed Bayan secretary-general Renato Reyes.

Alvarez: Impeachment can proceed

For Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez, a staunch supporter of President Duterte, the mode by which Calida chose to question Sereno’s qualification is correct because impeachment and the SC petition can proceed independently of each other.  

“The impeachment will push through because this is separate from the quo warranto petition. Solicitor General Calida was correct in filing it because there are two causes of action now,” Alvarez told reporters.

Alvarez explained that the SC petition is “exclusive to the judicial branch of government” while the impeachment proceedings fall within the jurisdiction of Congress.

“An impeachment presupposes a valid appointment while the quo warranto questions the validity of her appointment,” he said.

“If you violate the SALN law by failing to submit, then you are not only liable administratively but you can also be held criminally liable for that. And there are no exemptions even if you are a SC justice. It covers all government employees,” he added.

House gives Sereno 60-day reprieve

Majority Leader Rodolfo Fariñas said he is inclined to wait for the decision of the SC on the appeal filed by Calida.

“I see that there is a serious challenge on the legitimacy of the officer in question. Maybe by May 14, the Supreme Court has already resolved it. They have the whole month of April and half of May. In fact, according to news reports, they have already raffled it to Associate Justice (Noel) Tijam. So they will start tackling that,” he added.

Tijam is a law school classmate of the President, who appointed him to the SC. Tijam is also one of six justices who testified against Sereno in the committee on justice hearings.

Fariñas also said that even though the committee on justice is expected to endorse Sereno’s impeachment tomorrow, the earliest the House could tackle its report in plenary session would be in May.

“If we vote on it (in the committee level) on March 8, the report will be submitted to the committee on rules, which has 10 session days to include it in the order of business. Since we have only seven session days left as of today, we could take that up when we reconvene on May 14,” he told reporters. Fariñas chairs the rules committee.

The House and the Senate are going on a seven-week Lenten recess on March 21.

Once the report of the committee on justice is included in the order of business of the House, the plenary has 60 session days or until Oct. 31 to dispose of it.

“So the power to impeach includes when to impeach,” Fariñas said.

But Fariñas said transmittal of the case to the Senate in May could still be delayed by the readiness of senators to start trial.

“As majority leader, I will coordinate with my Senate counterpart when they are ready. How can we prosecute when we are not ready?” he said.

Impeachment rules 80% to 90% done

Meanwhile, Senate President Aquilino Pimentel III said the rules that will govern the impeachment trial are about “80 to 90 percent finished.”

“Maybe next week, we can present it on the floor,” Pimentel told reporters.

Pimentel said Sereno may or may not attend the trial depending on her defense strategy.

He also said new robes have already been ordered for the senators, who will be acting as judges in the trial, including for Sen. Leila de Lima, who is detained at Camp Crame on drug-related charges.

Pimentel said he is not discounting the possibility of De Lima participating in the trial if she is able to find a way to be released from detention.

But presidential spokesman Harry Roque advised De Lima not to push her luck by hoping to sit as judge in the Senate impeachment court.

“My advice to her: libreng mangarap. Manood na lang siya ng TV kung mayroon siyang TV sa kulungan (Dreaming is free. She should just watch the impeachment trial on television if she has television in her detention room),” Roque said. – With Jess Diaz, Delon Porcalla, Emmanuel Tupas, Rhodina Villanueva, Alexis Romero

Related video: