Indefinite leave for CJ, say 13 justices

Thirteen justices of the Supreme Court (SC) told Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno to go on indefinite leave, not a “wellness leave” as her camp announced.

The SC, convened as a whole, issued a statement yesterday amid the confusion arising from the conflicting statements made by the spokespersons of Sereno on whether

she is on indefinite or wellness leave.

Last Tuesday, the 13 SC justices met and discussed several issues before they came out with a consensus that “the Chief Justice should take an indefinite leave.”

SC spokesman Theodore Te said only 13 justices formed the consensus because Justice Alfredo Benjamin Caguioa was on leave at that time and did not attend their meeting.

Those who signed the onepage statement were Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio, Associate Justices Presbiterio Velasco Jr., Teresita Leonardode Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Mariano del Castillo, Estela Perlas-Bernabe, Marvic Leonen, Francis Jardaleza, Samuel Martires, Noel Tijam, Andres Reyes Jr., and Andres Gesmundo.

Sereno first consulted with Carpio and Velasco, the two most senior SC magistrates, before announcing she would be going on an indefinite leave.

But instead of going on leave on March 12-23, she moved it to an earlier period, March 1-15.

In filing her leave, Sereno cited the “demands of the Senate where I intend to fully set out my defenses to the baseless charges.”

While on indefinite leave, she would prepare for her possible Senate impeachment trial.

The justices apologized for the confusion over the announcement of the Chief Justice’s spokespersons regarding her taking a leave of absence.

“The Court en banc regrets the confusion that the announcement and media releases of the spokespersons of the Chief Justice have caused, which seriously damaged the integrity of the Judiciary in general and the Supreme Court in particular,” the 13 justices said.

“In the ordinary course of events, the Court expected the Chief Justice to cause the announcement only of what was really agreed upon without any modification or embellishment,” they added.

The justices said they would discuss the matter in a separate proceeding.

Asked if Sereno would be allowed to use the controversial P5-million bullet proof Toyota Land Cruiser during her indefinite leave, Te said answered in the affirmative since Sereno is still the incumbent Chief Justice.

“She is just on leave. She did not resign. (It is just an) indefinite leave. She is still the Chief Justice (and Senior Associate) Carpio is the acting Chief Justice,” Te said.

The purchase of the sports utility vehicle was one of the issues raised against her before the House of Representatives’ committee on justice.

SC dynamics ‘untenable’

The dynamics among the 15 members of the SC has become untenable, that to Oriental Mindoro Rep. Rey Umali it would be in the best interest of the judiciary for Sereno to relinquish her post the soonest.

“The SC is not only divided; it’s falling down. Do you think they can mend their differences in the next 10 years or so?” Umali asked.

Umali is the chairman of the House of Representatives’ committee on justice deliberating the impeachment complaint against Sereno.

The Chief Justice’s term will end in mid-2030 – encompassing four presidents starting from her political benefactor Noynoy Aquino (2010-2016), incumbent President Duterte (2016-2022) and two more leaders who will be elected in 2022 and 2028.

“You have in the SC now majority of justices who said very, very unkind words of her as the CJ and the leader of the judiciary. It’s all about leadership,” Umali said, which highlighted the internal animosity and has now been reached nationwide prominence.

“How can you lead an institution, one branch of government – and a dysfunctional branch at that – when you have majority of your members hating your guts or not liking how you handle the court?” he added, noting Sereno’s unilateral decisions in a collegial body.

“How can you face them again after characterizing you as inhuman, mentally dishonest? That is a call for practicality. She should resign now to save the time and even the resources of the country. She will do the country the favor,” Umali said.

The senior administration lawmaker, who was also privy to the impeachment of the late chief justice Renato Corona in 2012, was referring to the Sereno’s hostile relationship with practically all of her 14 colleagues.

Umali believes the House will eventually impeach Sereno citing “rock solid” evidence like her “non-filing” of statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs) which is worse than Corona’s concealment of $750,000 in dollar accounts.

Sereno guilty — Alvarez

Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez likewise believes Sereno is guilty.

“I think there is more than enough grounds. The grounds are there and what we’ve gathered in the investigation are the ones that will support those grounds – betrayal of public trust. So, those incidents that would constitute betrayal of public trust,” Alvarez said.

The Davao del Norte congressman also told CNN Philippines that the testimony of veteran clinical psychologist Geraldine Tria about Sereno’s mental disturbance could fall within the “betrayal of public trust.”

“That carries a heavy weight because for me, that is considered betrayal of public trust since you pretended that you are psychologically capable. You actually failed the exam. In that case, you cheated on the Filipino people, didn’t you?” the Speaker maintained.

Malacañang maintained it had nothing to do with the impeachment complaint against Sereno, noting that her colleagues in the high court were the ones who made the accusations against her.

“What I can say is do not blame the Palace for that impeachment... It is clear that the ones who testified against her were her colleagues at the Supreme Court,” presidential spokesman Harry Roque said in a press briefing yesterday.

“We do not want to comment anymore. We once gave her an advice but the (Chief Justice) did not listen. For us, our final statement would be we hope (she) would reflect on what she should do because it is not just a personal case of the Chief Justice. The integrity of the Supreme Court and the judiciary as an institution lies on it,” he added.

Roque said it would be up to the SC and Congress to decide in case a petition to unseat Sereno over questions on her appointment in 2012 prospers.

“It’s novel, but I don’t see how the Executive can be involved in this other than if the quo warranto succeeds and the court orders that she should be removed, I can assure you, the Executive will implement it because we’re the chief implementor of the law,” Roque said.

Alvarez has asked the Office of the Solicitor General to conduct quo warranto proceedings against Sereno to determine whether she has the right to hold office.

The move came after some sectors questioned the validity of Sereno’s appointment because of her supposed failure to submit her SALNs for 17 years.

Sereno’s spokespersons maintained that the Chief Justice could not be removed from her post through quo warranto proceeding and could only be ousted through impeachment.

‘Fake news’

Meanwhile, a lawyer of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC) yesterday accused Sereno’s spokespersons of spreading “fake news” when they inaccurately informed the public that she went on a “wellness leave” when what she filed for was an “indefinite leave.”

In a statement, Manuelito Luna said that the Sereno camp reportedly deceived the public when it announced that Sereno took a wellness leave.

The spokespersons “clearly misled the public through their pronouncements which are in the nature of fake news,” Luna said.

He believed that a show cause order should also be issued against Sereno’s spokespersons because “their actions tended to undermine the authority of the SC en banc.” –