'Why the rush?' Sereno camp asks amid reports of special SC session
MANILA, Philippines — “Why the rush?”
The camp of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno posed this question over Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio’s remark that the Supreme Court may rule on the ouster plea in May.
“The SC is supposed to be on break after its last en banc session on April 24 in Baguio. They are on recess in May and are supposed to resume session on June 5,” lawyer Josalee Deinla, spokesperson of Sereno, said on Thursday.
Deinla stressed the significance of the quo warranto case “which, if granted, will upend our justice system as we know it.”
Solicitor General Jose Calida sought the nullification of Sereno’s appointment to the high court through a petition for quo warranto. He said that the chief justice failed to pass the “integrity test” for allegedly not meeting the Judicial and Bar Council’s submission requirement for Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth.
Carpio, interviewed by reporters at the sidelines of an event in Quezon City, said: “We hope to decide as soon as we can. By next month, we should be able to decide on it.”
READ: SC may rule on Sereno ouster petition in May, Carpio says
Following its summer session in Baguio City for the whole of April, the SC is scheduled to have their writing break next month.
A special en banc session may be called by the high tribunal to deliberate on urgent matters.
Reports citing unnamed sources say that the SC, currently led by Carpio, will hold a special full court session on May 17 to rule on Calida’s petition.
Interventions not yet heard
The Sereno spokesperson also raised the SC has yet to hear the two petitions for intervention, with prayer for the quo warranto petition’s dismissal, it noted.
Calida’s petition was met with four petitions for intervention filed by several groups.
The high tribunal has junked the Motion for Leave to File Motion to Intervene and Opposition-in-Intervention filed by the Makabayan bloc of lawmakers and another group of petitioners led by “running priest” Fr. Robert Reyes due to lack of merit.
The Integrated Bar of the Philippines also sought to intervene as a party in the case. The 40,000-strong group of lawyers backed Sereno's defense that only an impeachment case can oust a chief justice, as held by the 1987 Constitution.
The SC “noted” the IBP’s motion, and the petition filed by Sens. Leila De Lima and Antonio Trillanes IV.
Sereno camp alleges bias
Should the SC grant the quo warranto petition, through its reported ponente of the case Associate Justice Noel Tijam, Sereno’s camp will not be surprised.
Deinla said that during oral arguments on the petition, “the Justice ... exhibited manifest bias and prejudice against the Chief Justice and even refused to recuse himself from the proceedings.”
During the oral arguments, Tijam took a jab at Sereno and how she used her time while on indefinite leave.
He said: “I am happy you have productively used your leave while we’re busy deciding lots of cases. I understand you’ve been going around the country, attending lost of speaking engagements, also attending talk shows, giving interviews explaining your position on the impeachment charges as well as the quo warranto petition.”
The justice and Sereno also engaged in a heated exchange over her reported admission that she did not file her SALN, which the chief justice fiercely disputed.
Citing bias and prejudice, Sereno has asked Tijam and four other justices to inhibit from the case against her.
Associate Justices Teresita De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza and Tijam all refused to take their hands of the case.
Groups supporting Sereno have since called for their resignation if they will insist on tackling the case.
- Latest
- Trending
