In granting the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida, party-list congressmen Tomasito Villarin of Akbayan and Gary Alejano of Magdalo said, the eight justices violated the 1987 Constitution, which states that impeachable officials such as the chief justice can only be removed through impeachment and that the House of Representatives and the Senate have the sole authority to initiate and resolve impeachment cases, respectively.
The eight justices who favoured Calida were Associate Justices Noel Tijam, Teresita de Castro, Alexander Gesmundo, Francis Jardeleza, Samuel Martires, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin and Andres Reyes.
Calida’s quo warranto petition sought Sereno’s ouster for her failure to submit her complete statements of assets, liabilities and net worth during her tenure as faculty member of the University of the Philippines College of Law to the Judicial and Bar Council when she applied for the chief justice post in 2012.
“By removing the chief justice through quo warranto, the associate justices are culpable of violating these provisions of the 1987 Constitution, which can be a ground for their own impeachment. Members of the ‘Magnificent 7’ and other members of the House across party lines are expected to support this call for Congress to assert its constitutional power, which applies to Sereno’s case,” Villarin told Manila Times.
“Magdalo believes that the eight justices who granted the quo warranto petition to remove the chief justice committed an impeachable offence. Thus, we strongly believe that the filing of impeachment complaints against the justices is the only viable remedy to correct this mistake and save the integrity of the Supreme Court before the Filipino people,” Alejano said in a statement.
Rep. Edcel Lagman of Albay, the de facto leader of the opposition group, did not say if they would pursue the filing of an impeachment case against the eight justices but announced that they would come up with a official statement on the matter on May 22. Rep. Ariel Casilao of Anakpawis party-list agreed that the impeachment route was a remedy but said it was as good as asking for a miracle.
“As to holding the justices liable, there is the impeachment (process). But we know that it would be a tough road to take, considering that majority of the members of the House will not go for it,” Casilao said in an
interview.
Activists and supporters of ousted Supreme Court chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno light candles next to a coffin decorated with a caricature of President Rodrigo Duterte (bottom right) and portraits of Supreme Court justices who voted to oust Sereno during a vigil rally in front of the Supreme Court in Manila, yesterday.
By Llanesca T Panti
Manila Times
Filing an impeachment case against the eight Supreme Court justices is the remedy for the SC’s “unconstitutional” grant of a quo warranto petition that ousted Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno from her post, opposition lawmakers from the so-called Magnificent 7 have said.
In granting the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida, party-list congressmen Tomasito Villarin of Akbayan and Gary Alejano of Magdalo said, the eight justices violated the 1987 Constitution, which states that impeachable officials such as the chief justice can only be removed through impeachment and that the House of Representatives and the Senate have the sole authority to initiate and resolve impeachment cases, respectively.
The eight justices who favoured Calida were Associate Justices Noel Tijam, Teresita de Castro, Alexander Gesmundo, Francis Jardeleza, Samuel Martires, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin and Andres Reyes.
Calida’s quo warranto petition sought Sereno’s ouster for her failure to submit her complete statements of assets, liabilities and net worth during her tenure as faculty member of the University of the Philippines College of Law to the Judicial and Bar Council when she applied for the chief justice post in 2012.
“By removing the chief justice through quo warranto, the associate justices are culpable of violating these provisions of the 1987 Constitution, which can be a ground for their own impeachment. Members of the ‘Magnificent 7’ and other members of the House across party lines are expected to support this call for Congress to assert its constitutional power, which applies to Sereno’s case,” Villarin told Manila Times.
“Magdalo believes that the eight justices who granted the quo warranto petition to remove the chief justice committed an impeachable offence. Thus, we strongly believe that the filing of impeachment complaints against the justices is the only viable remedy to correct this mistake and save the integrity of the Supreme Court before the Filipino people,” Alejano said in a statement.
Rep. Edcel Lagman of Albay, the de facto leader of the opposition group, did not say if they would pursue the filing of an impeachment case against the eight justices but announced that they would come up with a official statement on the matter on May 22. Rep. Ariel Casilao of Anakpawis party-list agreed that the impeachment route was a remedy but said it was as good as asking for a miracle.
“As to holding the justices liable, there is the impeachment (process). But we know that it would be a tough road to take, considering that majority of the members of the House will not go for it,” Casilao said in an
interview.
