Takes apparent dig at some SC justices, too
(Eagle News) — Detained Senator Leila de Lima on Thursday, April 12, blamed a “shameless” Solicitor General Jose Calida for the “spectacle” in the Supreme Court during oral arguments on the quo warranto petition against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, and appeared to take a dig at some SC justices who she said “seemed to negate their possession of the cold impartiality of an unbiased judge.”
“(The spectacle) is unprecedented because it would take a really shameless Solicitor General to even attempt to pit the members of the Supreme Court against each other through a move that would give him, and the interests he represents, an undue upper hand in all future business he has before the Court,” De Lima said.
It was Calida who filed the quo warranto petition seeking to have Sereno’s appointment as Chief Justice nullified.
Under the Rules of the Supreme Court, the Solicitor General can file the petition against any individual illegally occupying a position.
De Lima added realizing Calida had a supposed lack of understanding of what the word integrity means was “almost as disturbing” as “the nightmarish surreality of what could happen to our judicial system” with the filing of the petition.
She said theoretically, if a sufficient number of justices decide to oust Sereno, “there would be no other forum for further appeals or redress through another reviewing body because, being the court of last resort, there is no other court that can tell the SC that it ruled unwisely or abused its power.”
“Therefore, 8 or more members, none of whom were elected by the Filipino, might just do the unthinkable and undo what a constitutionally mandated body, the JBC, and an elected official, the President, had done, in a proceeding where those involved in the selection and appointment process are not even impleaded. That is a prospect that is so prone to abuse that it is terrifying to imagine,” she said.
According to De Lima, the reality was “even more disturbing.”
She said during the oral arguments, “the Chief Justice was basically put on the witness stand and forced to answer questions from colleagues with whom she has a personal and, apparently as to some, less than easygoing relationship – something that is not unexpected given that their mandate as an institution and as individual members of the Court mean that they are expected to butt heads, when necessary, over critical legal issues.”
Apparently taking a dig at some of the justices, De Lima said the proceedings, “especially those involving the CJ’s personal testimony, uncomfortably seemed like an interrogation, during which her counsels were verbally and directly berated for conferring with her because it annoyed some justices, under a situation where it isn’t even clear if her counsels were allowed to object to certain lines of questioning.”
“Not even those charged with the most heinous of crimes under our current criminal justice system has been subjected to such an unstructured, for lack of a better word, interrogation,” she said.
She said this was compounded by the “manner and substance of the questioning of some members of the Court,” who she said made “not-so-subtle personal digs at the CJ that seemed irrelevant to the issue at hand,” and that “to an onlooker, seemed to negate their possession of the cold impartiality of an unbiased judge.”
She said if this were a “real jury,” “it may very well be that many of them would already be disqualified, not the least because some of them were, at some point, her rivals to the post she now holds.”
“(But) all members of the Court still have the opportunity to prove that they have the self-awareness to recognize their own inclinations, susceptibilities and personal feelings, and the courage to set them aside and surrender their own hubris in order to protect the independence of the Judiciary and be the champions of the Rule of Law,” she said.
“They still have the chance to rise to the challenge of proving themselves to be the sober, impartial arbiters of fairness and justice that they are mandated to be, and that the nation needs them to be,” she added.
On Tuesday, April 10, Sereno underwent tense questioning about the allegations against her, , such as her alleged failure to file her complete Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth, from her colleagues.
She seemed to have found an ally in Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, who said the SALN was merely a “tool” and not a “measure of integrity,” as alleged by Calida.
