Just six years after the Supreme Court was rocked by an inglorious impeachment trial that removed a sitting Chief Justice and by the contentious appointment of the court’s youngest member to replace him, the country’s high tribunal has again found itself saddled by controversy, division and disarray.
As the people marked the start of the year 2012, the nation was also bracing for the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona. The House of Representatives voted to send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate for trial on the same day the impeachment complaint was filed before the justice committee. The vote came just one week after then President Benigno S. Aquino III lambasted Corona, who was seated a few feet away from him, as being beholden to Arroyo.
Aquino had strongly protested the appointment of Corona as chief justice on May 12, 2010 or two days after the elections, alleging that the constitution bars the President from making appointments two months before the election and until the end of her term. The Supreme Court, however, said the judiciary is not covered by the ban and upheld Corona’s appointment.
Aquino continued his attacks on Corona after he assumed the presidency on July 1, 2010, and pursued his criticism of the Chief Justice in the days leading to the impeachment trial. The Supreme Court justices rallied behind Corona during the impeachment trial and employees of the judiciary staged a court holiday in support of the embattled chief justice on the opening day of the Senate trial on Dec. 13, 2012.
After a lengthy trial presided by then Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, Corona was found guilty on May 29, 2012 of Article II of the Articles of Impeachment pertaining to his failure to fully disclose his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN).
On August 24 that year, Aquino appointed Maria Lourdes Sereno as the youngest ever and first female Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, bypassing more senior justices, including Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro. Sereno was the fourth most junior member of the tribunal and had been appointed to the Supreme Court only two years earlier.
Sereno’s appointment caused an upheaval and division in the Supreme Court that obviously continues to this day as evidenced by six justices testifying against her, the justices’ unanimous decision to declare her on indefinite leave pending her expected impeachment trial, and the move of 10 associate justices to join tribunal employees in wearing red in protest against Sereno.
In an article titled “A daunting task for Chief Justice Sereno,” dated August 28, 2012 or four days after Sereno’s appointment, I warned that the disgruntled feeling of the bypassed senior justices would hound the new chief justice for many years to come.
Here is an excerpt of that article:
“While it is assumed that the Chief Justice can wield her influence over the rest of the court, in the case of Sereno, it may be much more difficult for her to enjoy this privilege, especially in the first few years of her projected 18-year tenure as the highest magistrate of the land.
“Other than the four justices who had the courtesy to attend Sereno’s oath-taking ceremony in Malacanang on Saturday, the rest of the justices may find it difficult to accept the fact that President Aquino had bypassed them in favor of the fourth most junior justice. Sereno was 12th in seniority. Sereno’s appointment marked the first time under the 1987 Constitution that the Chief Justice did not come from the five most senior justices.
“Unless impeached or incapacitated, Sereno will serve as chief justice for a total of 18 years, way beyond the term of Aquino and extending into the terms of three more presidents after him. This means that the 13 remaining justices know that none of them will ever have the chance to become chief justice, all because the President decided to choose the youngest among them.
“In this regard, there may be truth to a news report by the Manila Times that most of the justices were “devastated” by Sereno’s appointment. Eight of the justices opted to boycott the oath-taking event, including the four senior justices nominated by the Judicial and Bar Council.
“The report quoted some justices as questioning why Aquino appointed Sereno despite her allegedly getting a poor rating in the psychiatric exams conducted on the eight persons nominated by the JBC. Sereno was reported to have attained a rating of four, with five being the lowest rating.
“The Times report added: “Based on an 11-page Psychiatric and Psychological Report submitted by a team of two psychiatrists and two psychologists to the members of the JBC, Sereno got a grade of “four” when her mental health was examined.
“Under the existing policy of the JBC, an applicant to any position in the judiciary who garnered a grade of four shall be considered “Not Recommended.” Anyone who gets a grade of five shall be deemed mentally disturbed.
“The report said that Sereno is “dramatic and emotional, she appears energetic and all smiles and agreeable, but with religious preoccupation in almost all significant aspects of her life. She projects a happy mood but has depressive markers too. There is a strong tendency to make decisions based on current mood thus, outcome is highly subjective and self-righteous.”
“We don’t respect her. Alam namin kung paano siya magwala dito sa [we know how she throws tantrums in the] en banc,” another magistrate told The Times.
“This disgruntled feeling will surely pervade among the justices for a long time to come, especially in the remaining years of President Aquino. And that does not augur well for a President who was apparently pissed off by recent decisions by the Supreme Court that he said was prejudiced against him.
“By bypassing the justices, Aquino may have worsened this prejudice, if indeed that was the prevailing sense in the high tribunal. It must be recalled that most of the justices – in fact almost the entire judiciary — rallied behind impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona because they saw the impeachment as an affront to the constitutionally-mandated balance of power among the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government.
“The appointment of Sereno, seen as a loyal ally of Aquino, and the breaking of tradition of picking from among the most senior justices in appointing a Chief Justice certainly won’t help in getting at least some of the Arroyo-appointed justices to his side.
“Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno indeed faces a tough challenge ahead of her. She has to try to soothe the sour moods of the justices while trying to institute reforms in a judiciary whose image was severely damaged during the impeachment trial of Corona.
“There is no doubt that the entire judiciary needs drastic reforms to solve the huge case backlog, curb corruption in the courts, and bring back the people’s trust. Chief Justice Sereno needs all the help she can get to achieve this goal, including those justices that are perceived to be enemies of the Aquino administration. It will take a great deal of both political will and statesmanship to achieve this.
“Theoretically, she has 18 years to do this. But failure in the next four years would expose her to possibly the same fate as her disgraced predecessor when her benefactor no longer wields the power over the legislature.”
Apparently, Sereno has failed to rally the justices behind her. This writer hopes, however, that the Supreme Court, now led by acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio, would look beyond their hurt feelings when they decide on a quo warranto petition challenging the validity of the appointment of Sereno as the nation’s chief magistrate, and asking the tribunal to void the appointment, thus negating the need for impeachment.
The Constitution is very clear in stating that the Chief Justice and other members of the Supreme Court can only be removed thru impeachment. The tribunal should not allow itself to be used by the Duterte administration in going after its most vocal critics and removing all obstacles to its authoritarian rule. If Sereno is guilty as charged, let the constitutionally mandated body make that decision after a fair trial.
Apparently, President Rodrigo Duterte and his allies are not very confident that they could muster the needed 16 votes in the Senate to convict Sereno, that’s why they are exploring this avenue suggested by Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez and implemented by Solicitor General Jose Calida.
The Supreme Court justices should let the impeachment process proceed and give their embattled chief the right to defend herself in the trial.
(valabelgas@aol.com)