''Quo warranto'' petition against Maria Lourdes Sereno

Republic of the Philippines v. Maria Lourdes Sereno
Court Supreme Court of the Philippines
Full case name Republic of the Philippines, represented by Solicitor General Jose C. Calida versus Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno
Decided May 11, 2018 (2018-05-11)
Citation(s) G. R. No. 237428
Case history
Subsequent action(s) Motion for reconsideration filed on May 31, 2018; denied with finality on June 19, 2018
Related action(s) Impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives for the determination of probable cause due to the failure to declare Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN), tax misdeclarations and unauthorized expenses
Ruling
  • Granting the petition for the issuance of the extraordinary writ of quo warranto to declare respondent guilty of unlawfully holding and exercising the office of the Chief Justice and thereby ousted and excluded her from holding the position
  • Order to show cause for violating Code of Professional Responsibility and Code of Judicial Conduct for transgressing the Sub judice rule
Court membership
Judges sitting Antonio Carpio, Presbitero Velasco Jr., Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo, Estela Perlas Bernabe, Marvic Leonen, Francis Jardeleza, Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa, Samuel Martires, Noel Tijam, Andres Reyes Jr., Alexander Gesmundo
Case opinions
Decision by Associate Justice Noel Tijam
Concurrence Justices de Castro, Peralta, Bersamin, Jardeleza, Tijam, Martires, Reyes, and Gesmundo
Concur/dissent Justices Velasco Jr. and del Castillo
Dissent Justices Carpio, Bernabe, Leonen, Caguioa

The quo warranto petition against Maria Lourdes Sereno (Republic of the Philippines vs. Maria Lourdes Sereno) filed before the Supreme Court of the Philippines was a successful attempt to remove Maria Lourdes Sereno from her post as Chief Justice of the Philippines' high court. The petition was made to nullify the appointment of Sereno as Chief Justice of the High Court. Sereno has also faced possible impeachment prior to the granting of the petition. Sereno has faced criticism from the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte for expressing opinion against the Philippine Drug War.

The decision received favorably by the Duterte administration as well as political allies while critics of the petition viewed Sereno's removal from office as an attack on judicial independence of the Supreme Court.

Concurrent impeachment process

During Maria Lourdes Sereno's de facto tenure as Chief Justice during the administration of President Rodrigo Duterte, Sereno has faced possible impeachment. An impeachment process against Sereno began on August 30, 2017, when 25 lawmakers filed a petition against her for failure to declare her wealth in full during her 17-year teaching period at the University of the Philippines College of Law.[1][2]

On August 30, 2017, at least 25 members of the House of Representatives supported the impeachment against the Chief Justice.[3] The main reasons for the impeachment proceedings, according to the complainant, lawyer Larry Gadon, was that Sereno allegedly failed to declare her Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net worth (SALN) and was also responsible for tax misdeclarations and unauthorized expenses.[3] The University of the Philippines (UP) and the Office of the Ombudsman could only produce Sereno’s SALNs from the years 1998, 2002, and 2006.[4][5]

On March 8, the House of Representatives found probable cause to impeach Sereno due to "allegations that Sereno committed culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, corruption, and other high crimes" by a vote of 38–2.[6] The impeachment process ended due to Sereno's removal from office through a quo warranto petition granted in May 2018.

Quo warranto petition

After an impeachment process against Sereno as begun, a quo warranto petition seeking to void Sereno's appointment as Chief Justice was filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida over alleged lack of integrity. Sereno questioned the petition, insisting that the only legal way to remove her from her post was impeachment.[7] The petition claims that despite having been employed at the University of the Philippines College of Law from November 1986 to June 1, 2006, Sereno's Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) records at the UP HRDO only include those for the years 1985, 1990, 1991, 1993-1997, and 2002, while her SALN records at the Office of the Ombudsman produced by the office for perusal only include those from the years 1999–2009.[8]

Indefinite leave of Sereno

Following the impeachment process filed against her, Sereno took an indefinite leave on March 1, 2018, but said she would not resign.[9][10] Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio served as Acting Chief Justice, previously served during the transition between Corona's impeachment and appointment of Sereno.[11] She ended her leave on May 9, 2018.[12] Sereno's spokesperson and lawyer Jojo Lacanilao denied to ANC that Sereno was forced to go on leave.[13] Oriental Mindoro Representative Rey Umali, however, urged Sereno to resign.[14]

Decision on the quo warranto petition

Deciding on the quo warranto petition en banc,[15] the Supreme Court justices voted to remove Sereno from the court on May 11, 2018, by a vote of 8-6[8], making Sereno the first officer in the Philippines unlawfully holding office to be removed from office without an impeachment trial.[16] According to Sereno's lawyer, Sereno is filing a motion for reconsideration of the decision.[17][18], which she filed on May 31, 2018.

Supreme Court decision of removal Sereno[19]
In Favor (8) Opposed (6)

Case opinions

Concurring and Majority Opinion

The Majority opinion was written by Justice Noel Tijam and concurred by 7 other Associate Justices. The Court invoke the doctrine of transcendental importance to exercise Judicial review over the case, invoking that the quo warranto petition is valid exercise of constitutional duty of settling actual controversy. The Court ruled that quo warranto proceedings and impeachment proceedings can be proceed independently and simultaneously due to the fact that they are distinct facts and circumstance; quo warranto assails the eligibility and valid exercise of the position whereas the impeachment is removal by committing the grounds specified under the Constitution, furthermore, the Congress may continue to address the impeachment without prejudice from the Court and the principle of Separation of powers

The Court ruled that plain interpretation of the Constitution that impeachment is not an exclusive remedy in challenging the legitimacy of valid exercise of the position, the word "may" is construed as a discretionary and not a mandatory one. The Court also invoke its supervision on the Judicial and Bar Council in performance of its duties and whether the constitutional requirement of filing declaration of assets, liabilities and net worth is properly complied, non-filing of the said requirements entails the doubt on the matter of integrity of the petitioner and cannot be cured by her nomination as Chief Justice

The Court later denied the motion of reconsideration of the petitioner and issued a decision reprimanding the petitioner for violating the sub judice rule of the Code of Professional Responsibility.

Dissenting Opinion

Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio voted against the removal of Sereno from office through the quo warranto petition, but nevertheless wrote in his dissenting opinion that her "repeated non-filing of SALN" constitutes "a culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust, which are grounds for impeachment under the Constitution".[20]

Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, in his dissenting opinion, called the petition "a legal abomination" that should have been dismissed. He expressed disfavor in removing an impeachable official through a quo warranto petition, writing: "We render this Court subservient to an aggressive Solicitor General. We render those who present dissenting opinions unnecessarily vulnerable to powerful interests."[21][22]

In the dissenting opinion of Associate Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa, He invoked that improbability of the ouster due to the constitutionally provided mode of removal of impeachable officials. The inability of the Court to resolve matters within its own walls is a reflection of disservice to the institution and its individual members. He describe the case by opining that the Court commit seppuku without honor. [23]

Reactions on the decision

The petitioner, Solicitor General Jose Calida, stated: "The Supreme Court decision ousting Maria Lourdes Sereno augurs well for the country, as it preserves the stability and integrity of the Judiciary. This decision is the epitome of its exercise of judicial independence."[24]

Senator Antonio Trillanes said that the Supreme Court Justices had committed a "heinous crime against our justice system".[24]

The New York-based Human Rights Watch called the decision "unprecedented and nefarious," adding that "Sereno’s ouster also kicks open the door for wanton removals of members of other constitutional bodies, such as the Commission on Human Rights. ... Ultimately, the rejection of constitutional checks and balances concentrates power in the hands of Duterte and his allies, posing the greatest danger to democracy in the Philippines since the Marcos dictatorship."[25]

Aftermath

Associate Justice Antonio Carpio became acting Chief Justice following Sereno's removal from office.
Justice Teresita De Castro was formally appointed to replace Sereno as the Chief Justice in August 25,2018

With the removal of Maria Lourdes Sereno from her post as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines, she altogether leaves the high court. When she was appointed Chief Justice, she vacated her position as Associate Justice and therefore cannot assume her former position again. She is given the right to file a motion for reconsideration against the Supreme Court's decision to remove her as Chief Justice, which she filed on May 31, 2018.[26]

The Supreme Court denied with finality Sereno's motion for reconsideration for lack of merit on June 19, 2018 voting 8-6, upholding the quo warranto decision. The ruling also states that no further pleading will be entertained as well as order for immediate entry of judgement.[27]

Senior Justice Antonio Carpio assumed the post of Chief Justice in an acting capacity starting May 14, 2018, following Sereno's removal from office.[28]

Opposition lawmakers of the Congress filed an impeachment complaint on August 23, 2018 against 7 Associate Justices who voted for the quo warranto petition for removing the Chief Justice based on the grounds of culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayal of public trust.[29] In August 25, Teresita de Castro, who only had two months left to serve in office, was appointed by president Rodrigo Duterte as the new Chief Justice. The appointment was criticized due to her expected short term of two months since she is obligated to retire on October 8, 2018, as well as her role as one of the five sitting justices who sought to nullify the appointment of Sereno as Chief Justice.[30][31]

See also

References

  1. ↑ "Palace: Quo warranto petition vs Sereno 'unprecedented'". ABS-CBN News.
  2. ↑ "Gadon complaint over SALN shows desperation: Sereno lawyer". ABS-CBN News.
  3. 1 2 "25 lawmakers endorse impeachment complaint vs Sereno". Rappler.
  4. ↑ "SC en banc wants Sereno to explain missing SALNs".
  5. ↑ "Who is Larry Gadon, the man behind one Sereno impeachment complaint?". Rappler. Retrieved 2018-05-13.
  6. ↑ "House justice panel finds probable cause to impeach Sereno". Philippine Daily Inquirer.
  7. ↑ Nagrimas, Nicole Ann (May 10, 2018). "Law profs say quo warranto vs. Sereno unconstitutional". GMA News. Retrieved May 11, 2018.
  8. 1 2 "G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018" (PDF). Supreme Court of the Philippines. May 11, 2018. Retrieved May 11, 2018.
  9. ↑ "Sereno asserts 'indefinite leave is not a resignation'". ABS-CBN News.
  10. ↑ "Sereno to go on 'indefinite leave'". ABS-CBN News.
  11. ↑ Punay, Edu (May 12, 2018). "The dissent:'Sereno liable but must be impeached'". The Philippine Star. Retrieved May 12, 2018.
  12. ↑ Requejo, Rey (May 10, 2018). "Sereno returns to work, faces SC ouster decision". Manila Standard. Retrieved May 10, 2018.
  13. ↑ "Was Sereno forced to take a leave from the Supreme Court?". ABS-CBN News.
  14. ↑ "Umali to Sereno: Do country a favor and resign". ABS-CBN News.
  15. ↑ Canlas, Jomar (May 11, 2018). "Chief Justice Sereno ousted". Manila Times. Retrieved May 11, 2018.
  16. ↑ Torres-Tupas, Tetch (May 11, 2018). "Justices remove Sereno from SC". Philippine Daily Inquirer. Retrieved May 11, 2018.
  17. ↑ "Sereno to appeal her ouster". ABS-CBN.
  18. ↑ Punay, Edu (May 12, 2018). "Supreme Court Ousts Sereno". The Philippine Star. Retrieved May 13, 2018.
  19. ↑ "Supreme Court ousts Chief Justice Sereno". Rappler.
  20. ↑ "Despite dissent, Carpio says Sereno guilty of impeachable offense". ABSCBN News. Archived from the original on May 14, 2018. Retrieved May 14, 2018.
  21. ↑ "Fear for democracy after top Philippine judge and government critic removed". The Guardian. 12 May 2018. Retrieved 13 May 2018.
  22. ↑ Morallo, Audrey (11 May 2018). "Ouster petition vs Sereno a 'legal abomination,' says dissenting justice". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 14 May 2018.
  23. ↑ "Caguioa on Sereno ouster: SC committed suicide without honor". GMA News. 12 May 2018. Retrieved 14 May 2018.
  24. 1 2 "Senators react on Sereno ouster; petitioners hail "historic victory"". UNTV News and Rescue. Archived from the original on May 12, 2018. Retrieved May 12, 2018.
  25. ↑ "Human Rights Watch condemns 'nefarious' Sereno ouster".
  26. ↑ Morallo, Audrey (11 May 2018). "After ouster, Sereno can't return to previous associate justice post". The Philippine Star. Retrieved 14 May 2018.
  27. ↑ "G.R. No. 237428. June 19, 2018" (PDF). Supreme Court of the Philippines. June 19, 2018. Retrieved June 20, 2018.
  28. ↑ Panaligan, Rey (13 May 2018). "Carpio assumes SC Chief Justice position". Manila Bulletin. Retrieved 13 May 2018.
  29. ↑ Lawmakers to file impeachment complaints against 7 SC justices
  30. ↑ https://www.rappler.com/nation/210284-teresita-de-castro-supreme-court-chief-justice
  31. ↑ "Teresita Leonardo de Castro is new Chief Justice". CNN Philippines. August 25, 2018. Retrieved August 25, 2018.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.