By Meanne Corvera and Moira Encina
Eagle News Service
The 90-day period within which the post of Chief Justice should be filled begins today, June 19, the Supreme Court said.
SC Spokesperson Theodore Te made the statement in a press conference on the same day, right after announcing the High Court’s upholding of its earlier decision that nullified Maria Lourdes Sereno’s appointment as chief magistrate.
As such, the Judicial and Bar Council is expected to allow applications for the post.
The JBC will then submit a shortlist of final applicants to the position to President Rodrigo Duterte, who is expected to choose the new Chief Justice.
In a statement, Senator JV Ejercito expressed hope the “next Chief Justice will start the process of internal healing and begin restoring the public’s faith” in the SC.
He said the SC, after all, “has been severely undermined by this sad episode in our history.”
Only via impeachment
But other senators reiterated their stand it was wrong to have removed Sereno from office in the first place.
“Duterte, once again, succeeded in destroying another bulwark of our fragile Democracy, the Supreme Court. Now, only half of the Senate stands in his way from completely installing his ruthless and corrupt
authoritarian regime,” Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, a critic of the Duterte administration, said.
Senator Joel Villanueva said the “appropriate process to discuss the removal of CJ Sereno is through an impeachment process.”
“Clearly, according to the Constitution, the Senate has the sole responsibility in exacting accountability to judicial appointees or impeachable officers,” he said,
As for Senate Minority Leader Franklin Drilon, he said the SC decisions left a “slippery slope,” as “any officer who is subject to impeachment can now be removed through a quo warranto proceeding.”
He noted that a resolution expressing the Senate’s disapproval of the decisions may, however, no longer push through.
“As a practical matter, the majority in the Senate can assert that the issue is now academic and would therefore be reluctant to debate on the quo warranto resolution. Sa akin malabo na, while personally I
still believe that there is nothing wrong with expressing an opinion on the decision of the SC, the majority may feel that we can express our individual beliefs on the quo warranto but not the Senate as an
institution,” he said.
The resolution has been signed by 14 senators but it was not discussed during the plenary before the Congress’ break in May due to a lack of quorum.
In upholding its May 11 ruling, the SC said Sereno did not raise any new arguments that warrant its reversal.
Sereno has argued impeachment was the only way to remove an impeachable official according to the Constitution.
But the SC said in its May 11 ruling that a distinction should be made between impeachment, a “political” process, and quo warranto, a “judicial” process.
