Sereno seeks extension to respond to SC ruling

MANILA, Philippines — Ousted chief justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno yesterday filed a three-page motion asking the Supreme Court to give her until June 9 to respond to a show cause order in connection with her alleged violation of the Code of Professional Responsibility and the Code of Judicial Conduct.

Josa Deinla, one of the spokespersons for Sereno, said the former SC chief filed the motion seeking a 15-day extension to comment on the order issued by the high court for violating the sub judice rule or the prohibition to publicly discuss an ongoing case, particularly the quo warranto petition against her.

The SC, through the decision penned by Associate Justice Noel Tijam, had earlier said Sereno might even be “held liable for disbarment for violating the Canons of Professional Responsibility by repeatedly discussing the merits of the quo warranto petition.”

Sereno was also being asked to explain why she should not be sanctioned for “casting aspersions and ill motives to the members of the Supreme Court.”

Last May 11, the SC gave her 10 days from receipt to explain why she should not be sanctioned.

In a forum last March, SC Associate Justice Teresita de Castro took offense when Sereno commented on the pending quo warranto case against her. 

Sereno was invited to speak before officials and members of the Philippine Women Judges Association where she complained about the “lies and bullying” in the ouster petitions against her.

De Castro took the podium next and said: “I’m sorry that the Chief Justice has taken this opportunity to discuss a matter that is sub judice. We have given her all the courtesy and I sincerely hope that she should not have dealt with a matter that is pending with the court.”

Sereno, in several of her public speaking engagements, also reportedly accused six justices of showing bias against her.

She has filed six separate motions for inhibitions against Associate Justices De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza, Noel Tijam and Samuel Martires but none of them inhibited from the ruling on the quo warranto.

Last May 11, the SC voted 8-6 ousting Sereno as chief justice. 

‘House commits treason’

Opposition Rep. Edcel Lagman of Albay accused the House of Representatives yesterday of “committing treason against itself” by abandoning the impeachment of ousted chief justice Sereno.

Lagman said the larger chamber of Congress forfeited its constitutional power of impeachment “in the wake of the power grab by eight justices of the Supreme Court who removed Sereno by granting an irregular and improvident quo warranto petition.”

“The articles of impeachment submitted more than a month ago by the committee on justice to the committee on rules have not been calendared for plenary deliberation and voting,” he said.

He said the House leadership has unilaterally deferred to the 8-6 vote of the SC removing Sereno “without following the constitutionally mandated impeachment process.”

Lagman maintained that the Constitution “unequivocally mandates that it is only by impeachment instituted by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate can an impeachable official be removed from office.”

He cited the pertinent provisions of the Charter:             

• The President, Vice President, members of the high court, members of the constitutional commissions and the ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment.

• The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment.

• The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment.  – With Jess Diaz