Makabayan: Calida’s SC bid vs Sereno ‘proof of weak impeachment case’
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO/LYN RILLON
The quo warranto petition questioning the validity of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno’s appointment was a “proof” of a “weak” impeachment complaint against her, some House of Representatives members of the progressive Makabayan bloc said on Monday.
Solicitor General Jose Calida earlier filed a quo warranto case before the Supreme Court (SC) to question the validity of Sereno’s appointment, after it was bared during House hearings that the top magistrate failed to complete the submission of her statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) for 10 years to the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).
Under Rule 66 of the Rules of Court, a quo warranto proceeding is “an action by the government against a person who unlawfully holds a public office or holds a position which he or she is not qualified.”
READ: Solgen Calida questions Sereno’s qualifications before SC
In separate statements, Anakpawis Rep. Ariel Casilao, Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Isagani Zarate and Kabataan Rep. Sarah Elago lamented the continuous “attacks” against the top magistrate.
“Quo warranto option of the regimes continued attacks vs CJ and the entire co-equal branch is a clear proof of a weak impeachment complaint,” Casilao said.
“Nagpapanic mode na yata ang mga nasa likod ng walang humpay na atake laban kay CJ at kung ano-ano na ang ini-imbento at iimbentuhin para gipitin at pwersahin na mag-resign o patahimikin si CJ sa kanyang kritikal na mga tindig laban sa mga kontra mamamayan na polisiya ng administrasyon,” he added.
(Those behind the attacks against Sereno seem to be in panic mode and inventing all sorts of things just to force her to resign or remain quiet on her critical stance against the administration’s policies that are anti-people.)
Zarate echoed Casilao’s statement, saying the complaint exposes “their lack of belief” that the impeachment case against Sereno could withstand Senate trial.
These “maneuvers,” Zarate said, “lack legal and constitutional bases” because the 1987 Constitution clearly provides that a sitting justice of the SC could only be removed through the mechanism of impeachment.
Elago meanwhile sees the complaint as “nothing but harassment,” and another “offensive against the Chief Justice and the system of checks-and-balances in the government.”
“(President Rodrigo) Duterte and his cohorts are drawing all their cards to ensure monopoly of political power. It is evident that by filing a quo warranto petition, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) has proven itself to be another instrument and enabler of Duterte’s rising dictatorship,” she said.
Apart from the quo warranto case, Sereno is also facing an impeachment complaint at the House of Representatives justice committee, which is set to vote on its probable cause on Thursday.
Lawyer-complainant Lorenzo Gadon is accusing the top magistrate of culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, corruption and other high crimes. /je
