Antonio Carpio’s previous reluctance doomed chief justice bid — Palace

MANILA, Philippines — By initially declaring his reluctance to accept nomination for the post of chief justice so he would not benefit from the ouster of Maria Lourdes Sereno, Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio had left Malacañang with no choice but to appoint somebody else.

This was according to presidential spokesman Salvador Panelo, who maintained that the position of chief justice would not have become vacant in the first place had Sereno survived the move to oust her. President Duterte has appointed Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin as chief magistrate.

“What I am saying is if you follow his (Carpio) logic, it will apply to every vacancy because the vacancy was triggered by the ouster of Sereno. If Sereno were not ousted we would have her as Chief Justice until she retired,” Panelo told reporters in an interview yesterday.

Her colleagues voted  8-6 in June to uphold the quo warranto petition for her ouster filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida.

“That was the reason cited by the President. He (Carpio) said he would decline because he did not want to take advantage (of Sereno’s ouster),” he added.

If Sereno were not ousted, her term would have lasted until 2030.

Carpio was one of the magistrates who did not vote for Sereno’s removal as chief magistrate by quo warranto.

The senior associate justice, however, accepted his nomination for him to succeed former chief justice Teresita de Castro, who retired last October. De Castro took over after Sereno’s ouster.

Panelo reiterated that Carpio’s opposition to Duterte’s manner of handling the South China Sea issue had no bearing on the selection of chief justice.

“Look at (former presidential) spokesperson (Harry) Roque. He did not only campaign against him. He said a lot of things against the President,” he said.

Roque supported the presidential bid of former vice president Jejomar Binay in 2016.

“Just remember, it was discretionary on the part of the President. He also looked at other aspects,” Panelo said.

Asked if Carpio could still become chief justice, Panelo replied in Filipino: “But then again as you said, it can change, the President may change his mind. It’s up to the President. One still has hope as long as he lives.”

Some Catholic bishops, meanwhile, have expressed disappointment over the appointment of Bersamin.

Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) Episcopal Commission on Missions (ECM) chairman Sorsogon Bishop Arturo Bastes said he had hoped Carpio would get the appointment.

“I am disappointed with the appointment of Bersamin as chief justice. I expected Carpio to be the CJ. The reason why Carpio did not get his appointment is of course because of his strong (and correct) stand on the Philippines’ full right to the West Philippine Sea, which irks Duterte, who has become too subservient to China, a seemingly traitorous act and attitude,” Bastes said.

He also said Bersamin had shown his leaning by the way he voted in controversial cases:  favoring the burial of dictator Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani and upholding the quo warranto petition against Sereno.

“I hope that evil will not prevail at the Supreme (Court).”  

The Sorsogon prelate also called on all Filipinos to help ensure that the judiciary would be able to maintain its independence from the executive and the legislative.  

“Let us pray that our country be protected by Divine Providence from political, social and moral evil and danger. Heaven will eventually intervene,” he added.

CBCP Episcopal Commission on Laity (ECL) chairman Manila Auxiliary Bishop Broderick Pabillo said he doesn’t know Bersamin personally but has heard negative information about him.

“Sorry, I do not know him but the little that I hear of him is that he is not a man with an independent mind nor with conviction,” Pabillo said.

Meanwhile, CBCP-Episcopal Commission on Migrants and Itinerant People (ECMI) chairman Bataan Bishop Ruperto Santos said he is hopeful that Bersamin would “maintain the independence of the judiciary, and never be subservient to the executive branch and fight for the rule of law and not be beholden to the President who appointed him.” – With Evelyn Macairan