Restoring respectability to the Supreme Court

The bad blood with majority justices, not the constant heckling of her accusers, can make Sereno contemplate resigning.

The latest political joke is that House justice committee head Rey Umali will be the next Chief Justice. That’s why Supreme Court justices already are reporting their acts to him. The wisecrack is tasteless, really, given that the judiciary is supposed to be independent of Congress.

The cause of the quip was as ugly. Last Tuesday Umali’s group raked up the latest impeachment item against CJ Maria Lourdes Sereno. Simultaneously across town majority SC justices were haranguing her to resign. They had heard the previous week’s allegation at the House of her incomplete Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth. Those yearly disclosures are required of all government employees, which Sereno was as state university professor in 2001-2009. She should have given copies to the Judicial and Bar Council in 2010 to qualify as SC justice. Since those basics were lacking, they said, she should not have qualified too as CJ in 2012. They demanded that she step down to keep the SC’s respectability.

What she retorted is unreported, for the unnamed justices did not leak it to the press. Presumably she reminded them of every accused’s right to her day in court. Last Tuesday was not that day. Had she submitted to their questioning then, she prematurely would have revealed her defense in the forthcoming impeachment trial at the Senate. They instead made her go on indefinite leave, which she needs anyway to prepare for that ordeal. Whereupon, back at the House, Umali announced at the public hearing the “breaking news” that the justices had just texted to his mobile. SC en banc proceedings are bound by confidentiality.

For any impeachment to proceed, at least two of the three co-equal branches of government must conspire. Malacañang disavows any part to oust Sereno. Yet Sereno was the first high official to speak up against the Executive’s bloody war on drugs. Rights bodies and western governments have since been denouncing President Rodrigo Duterte for the unexplained killings, including of minors. Speaker Pantaleon Alvarez denies exacting vengeance on Sereno for lawyering in the 2000s against his airport contracts as then-transport secretary. Still his House supermajority is bent on removing Sereno, as seen in Umali’s committee’s haste. Duterte can stop any impeachment, as when he told congressmen to lay off of Vice President Leni Robredo. He can also instruct police-military officers to walk out of Congress hearings that insult them. There has been no caution against ganging up on Sereno.

On the contrary, the implications of the swarming on Sereno are serious. On the House committee’s order, the Bureau of Internal Revenue deputy commissioner had investigated Sereno’s income tax filings for 2005-2010. Last Tuesday that presidential appointee testified to spotting a possible P2.5-million evasion. Odd that the BIR would rake up tax records eight to 13 years old. The law states that, to avert harassment, the taxman may probe only up to a taxpayer’s past three years’ records; beyond that is a closed book. The BIR official claimed that fraud may be investigated up to ten years from discovery. Still the period of discovery must be within the allowable past three years. If the BIR can now break the rule on orders of a Congress committee, will not all taxpayers be open to extortion? Conversely, may not that committee forbid the BIR from looking into the members’ past three years’ filings?

On the committee’s prodding, the House expectedly will indict Sereno. Only then will the public hear her defense. The public will also be judging whether or not she is guilty. For now, all they’ve heard are the accusations.

While a CJ has been impeached before, Sereno’s is unprecedented in having an astounding 97 counts of wrongdoings. Aside from the missing SALNs and the tax deficiency, the most serious are her alleged overpriced purchase of a bullet-proofed SUV, overpriced computerization contracting, unilateral countermanding of SC collegial decisions, unauthorized formation of SC branch offices, luxurious travel expenses, and intercalating JBC decisions.

Another precedent was set in the House Committee’s determination of probable cause against Sereno. No less than six sitting justices and one newly retired substantiated nearly all of the charges against her. (In 2012 then Associate Justice Sereno had volunteered to testify against impeached CJ Renato Corona but was disallowed by the SC en banc.) This early political murmurs are that the Senate would acquit Sereno. Sixteen of 24 senators are needed to convict her but her accusers reportedly might not muster even eight.

But it is Sereno’s unpopularity within the SC itself that is her problem. Even if acquitted, she will return to that 15-man chamber where the vast majority want her out. Given the acrimonious words stated in the House hearings, the justices are unlikely to follow her anymore. The SC as the final repository of justice will sink. It is in that light, not the constant heckling by her accusers, that Sereno might contemplate resigning.

Resignation may save only Sereno from anymore torment. What will happen to the fractured Supreme Court is something to watch. Will the justices thence be able to restore respect for each other? Or will a majority of them disrespectfully demand irksome members to depart?

*      *      *

Catch Sapol radio show, Saturdays, 8-10 a.m., DWIZ (882-AM).

Gotcha archives on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Jarius-Bondoc/1376602159218459, or The STAR website http://www.philstar.com/author/Jarius%20Bondoc/GOTCHA