MANILA, Philippines - The Supreme Court (SC) on Tuesday stood by its earlier decision declaring that only one member of Congress can sit as member of the Judicial and Bar Council.
Voting 9-3-3, the magistrates dismissed the motion for reconsideration filed by Congress and maintained that the JBC should only have seven instead of eight members.
The JBC is an independent constitutional body mandated to screen aspirants for the positions in the Judiciary and the Office of the Ombudsman. It submits a shortlist of nominees to the President who then will make the appointment.
In its July 2012 ruling, the SC said "to allow the Legislature to have more quantitative influence in the JBC by having more than one voice speak, whether with one full vote or one-half a vote each, would, as one former congressman and member of the JBC put it, negate the principle of equality among the three branches of government which is enshrined in the Constitution."
Senator Francis "Chiz" Escudero and Iloilo City (5th District) Rep. Niel Tupas, Jr. are both members of the JBC representing Congress.
The case arose when former Solicitor General Francisco "Frank" Chavez questioned the JBC composition saying Section 8 (1) of Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution states that "a member of Congress" should represent the JBC.
Those who voted to dismiss the Congress' petition were Associate Justices Antonio Carpio, Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Martin Villarama, Jr., Jose Perez, Jose Mendoza, Bienvenido Reyes and Estela Perlas-Bernabe.
Those who dissented were Associate Justices Roberto Abad, Marvic Leonen and Mariano Del Castillo.
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Aranal Sereno and Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco, Jr. and Arturo Brion inhibited themselves from the case.
The SC said "the use of the singular letter "a" preceding "representative of Congress" in Section 8(1), Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution is unequivocal and leaves no room for any other construction. The word "Congress" is used in its generic sense. Considering the language of the subject constitutional provision is clear and unambiguous, there is no need to resort to extrinsic aids such as the records of the Constitutional Commission."
"The framers of the Constitution intended to create a JBC as an innovative solution in response to the public clamor in favor of eliminating politics in the appointment of members of the Judiciary. To ensure judicial independence, they adopted a holistic approach and hoped that, in creating a JBC, the private sector and the three branches of government would have an active role and equal voice in the selection of the members of the Judiciary," the SC said.
The SC also said the JBC's seven-member composition "serves a practical purpose, that is, to provide a solution should there be a stalemate in voting."