A revolving door is not good for the Supreme Court
LOOKING at her credentials, Teresita Leonardo-de Castro an appointment announced by Malacañang on Saturday or just a day after the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), the constitutional body that vets court nominees, submitted its shortlist of candidates to President Rodrigo Duterte.
female chief justice in Philippine history, because the appointment of her predecessor, Maria Lourdes Sereno, in 2012 was declared void by a majority of the Supreme Court, 8-6, in May following quo warranto proceedings initiated by Solicitor General Jose Calida.
Her title, again strictly speaking, is Chief Justice of the Philippines, not just of the Supreme Court, as she is the head of a co-equal branch of government, the Judiciary. De Castro, 69, is already one of the few women to become a member of the highest (and male-dominated) court of the land, and now has reached the pinnacle of the legal career.
Sereno, in contrast, secured her appointment from her college buddy, President Benigno Aquino 3rd, who had to make room for her by ousting Chief Justice Renato Corona in a highly irregular and politically charged impeachment trial. This was despite the fact that Sereno, 58, previously a University of the Philippines law professor and legal researcher, had no credentials (i.e. trial court experience, academic rigor) for the lofty post she was to occupy until her supposed retirement in 2030. The quo warranto pro particularly her failure to pass the integrity test for not submitting a complete set of statements of assets, liabilities and net worth, and even lying about it.
The same thing cannot be said of de Castro, who has served four decades in government after her sterling academic record at UP, and who was elected a few years ago as president of the International Association of Women Judges.
De Castro clerked for Martial Law Chief Justice Fred Ruiz Castro, became state counsel and then head of the legal staff of the Department of Justice, and presiding justice of the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court where she found the deposed president Joseph Estrada guilty of plunder.
We respect the President’s decision to appoint de Castro as chief justice. Surely, he has his reasons for it.
De Castro, however, is nearing the compulsory age of retirement, and is obliged under the 1987 Constitution to step down when she reaches 70 on October 8.
In the post-Marcos court, the median tenure of chief justices has been three years, enough to make a lasting imprint on Filipino jurisprudence or implement reforms in the administration of justice.
De Castro, who will have barely a month at the helm of the high tribunal, will not have this privilege. She will have barely warmed her seat when the JBC convenes to choose her successor, in proceedings she will preside over as chairman of the JBC.
It will be unfair on de Castro, an accomplished Filipina magistrate, for her appointment to be perceived by the public as simply a reward for helping remove Sereno.
De Castro’s appointment is reminiscent of the revolvingdoor policy in the Armed Forces, where generals close to retirement are often given the reward of a fourth star on their shoulders, to keep the military brass happy.
That cannot happen in Padre Faura. The Supreme Court, the last bastion of justice and the court of last resort, must be above the political fray.
De Castro however can still make a singular, meaningful act. She must ensure the selection of a worthy successor, someone who possesses not only a solid set of legal credentials but also enough time to make significant and lasting achievements before hanging the judicial robe for good. We wish her well.