(Eagle News) — Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was acting based on her own discretion when she issued the temporary restraining order on the Commission on Elections’ proclamation of party-lists in 2013.
According to her lawyers, this is in accordance with Section 6, Rule 7 of the SC Internal Rules that states that “the Chief Justice is expressly empowered to ‘act’ on urgent cases requiring immediate action, including initiatory pleadings praying for the issuance of a temporary restraining order” when the High Court is in recess.
“The Chief Justice could not be accused of falsifying anything. In the exercise of her own discretion and authority to issue TROs when the Court is in recess, the Chief Justice elected to issue a temporary restraining order under terms she considered just and proper,” they said.
They added that the power of Associate Justice Teresita de Castro as member in charge was “mere(ly) recommendatory.”
“..Since Justice De Castro was merely ‘recommending’ a course of action to the Chief Justice, and further considering that the proposed ‘temporary restraining order’ was merely a ‘draft,’ the Chief Justice can wholly accept, modify or even reject Justice De Castro’s recommendation,” they said.
On Wednesday, De Castro, who appeared for the first time in House panel hearings on the impeachment complaint filed against Sereno, said she was “taken aback” by the Chief Justice when she “alter(ed)” the TRO she recommended on the proclamation by the COMELEC of a senior citizens’ party-list.
Since she was the member in charge, she said she should have been consulted by the Chief Justice when Sereno issued a TRO to cover the proclamation of all party-lists instead.
