3 ex-SC chiefs thumb down relaxation of JBC rules for judicial aspirants

MANILA, Philippines - Three former chief justices of the Supreme Court (SC) have expressed opposition to a proposal of Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) member and Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. to ease qualifications for aspirants to judicial posts.

Former chief justices Hilario Davide Jr., Artemio Panganiban and Reynato Puno, all ex-officio chairs of the JBC during their respective terms in the SC, agreed that the proposal of Tupas would be contrary to the purpose of having strict requirements for candidates.

“You cannot expect me to favor any amendment because I was the main proponent. I ordered the drafting of the Internal Rules of the JBC immediately after my assumption as chief justice in 1998,” Davide said in an interview with reporters at the SC.

The former Philippine ambassador to the United Nations also believes that the requirements should even be strengthened to be able to have more qualified justices and judges and officials of the Office of the Ombudsman.

Panganiban agreed with Davide on this point.

He recently wrote in his column in another newspaper that higher standards are needed instead of watering down judicial standards as it is stated in the 1987 Constitution that all members of the judiciary should have “proven competence, integrity, probity and independence.”

In the end, Panganiban asked Tupas to withdraw his proposal.

Puno made a similar call to the JBC in a recent interview:

“On the contrary, the JBC should be stricter in the screening of aspirants for the judiciary.”

He further suggested that should Tupas’ proposal be allowed, the council “should call a public hearing for a wider consultation with the stakeholders of the justice sector.”

Also yesterday, JBC member and Justice Secretary Leila de Lima likewise expressed her reservation over the proposal of congressman Tupas.

“To me, the proposal to relax the qualifications would not be good,” she said.

She specifically opposed the idea of Tupas to give JBC the power to determine the gravity of a pending criminal or administrative case against an aspirant in deciding whether to allow his or her nomination to proceed.

“Practically, JBC would be preempting the decision of appropriate bodies handling the cases under that proposal,” she said.

The JBC is set to hold public hearings on Sept. 8, 9 and 12 to consult concerned sectors before deciding on the proposal.

Chief Justice Renato Corona, ex-officio chair of JBC, said they would hear the views of the stakeholders – Integrated Bar of the Philippines, law school deans, judges’ associations, prosecutors, Puno, Panganiban and Davide, former JBC member and Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Jr. and the public in general.

In a letter to Corona last month, Tupas specifically sought relaxation of this rule to give the JBC full discretion on whether or not an applicant will be nominated despite a pending criminal or administrative case against him.

Tupas recommended that those who have been fined up to P20,000 should still be considered for appointment or promotion to the judiciary.

The present rule allows only those who have been fined not more than P10,000 to be considered. The amendment, according to Tupas, allows more candidates to be nominated, especially if the case does not relate to one’s integrity.