JBC postpones vote after Senate, House pull out reps
The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) postponed voting for the final three nominees to the position of Chief Justice from Monday to Thursday next week, after leaders of both chambers of Congress agreed to pull out their respective representatives from the JBC following the Supreme Court decision limiting Congress’ representation to only one member.
Neither Sen. Francis Escudero nor Rep. Niel Tupas Jr. will represent Congress in the JBC.
“With due respect to the Supreme Court, Congress is composed of two houses,” Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said in an interview over radio station dzBB. “The Senate can’t represent the position of the House; neither can the House represent the position of the Senate,” he added.
Enrile, who gained plaudits for his handling of the impeachment trial, also indicated that a Chief Justice appointed by the President based on the list provided by the JBC might encounter questions later on because of the questionable status of the council membership.
Tupas said it would be “more prudent” for the JBC to delay its scheduled vote at 11 a.m. on Monday until the issue of Congress representation to the council has been resolved. The Senate and the House have filed a joint motion asking the Supreme Court to reconsider its decision allowing only one member to represent both chambers in the JBC.
JBC predicament
In a text message to the Inquirer, House Speaker Feliciano Belmonte said that both Escudero and Tupas were instructed not to participate in the JBC “pending further consultation with our respective members.”
“We can’t decide by ourselves … We will wait until it is clearly and correctly decided,” Enrile said, following a meeting on Friday in Makati with Belmonte, Tupas, Escudero and House Majority Leader Neptali Gonzales II to discuss the JBC predicament.
Belmonte said the same group would meet again on Monday “at the earliest” to discuss the next course of action.
Escudero indicated that he would follow the decision reached by the congressional leaders.
Postponement
In a text message last night, Supreme Court spokesperson, lawyer Gleoresty Guerra, stated that the JBC “final deliberations” were rescheduled from Monday to Thursday next week.
She said the postponement would give the Supreme Court, which convenes its en banc session every Tuesday, a chance to decide on the motion for reconsideration filed by Congress on the high tribunal’s ruling that only one member from Congress should participate in the JBC deliberations. The JBC also needs more time to study and evaluate the candidates, she added.
Earlier, JBC member Jose Mejia said the council was ready to proceed with the voting on Monday, adding that the absence of just one member would not affect the JBC quorum. Except for saying that the council was caught “flat-footed” by it, Mejia declined to comment further on the decision of Congress to withdraw both Escudero and Tupas from the JBC.
According to Tupas, Friday’s meeting also touched on the issue of who should preside over the JBC in the absence of the Chief Justice.
“Kakaiba ito (This is unusual),” Tupas said, adding that the Chief Justice was supposed to preside over the JBC, except that in this case, the position is vacant. The next logical choice, he added, was acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio but being himself a nominee to the post, he had inhibited himself.
‘Flawed’ composition
Enrile agreed, and described the composition of the JBC as “flawed,” adding that President Aquino “[would] have to appoint a Chief Justice as a matter of necessity.”
“He’s the appointing power. Nobody else,” he added.
The Senate President pointed out that the Constitution provided that the JBC may only be presided by the Chief Justice as its ex officio chair and that an acting Chief Justice and associate justice may not preside over the JBC proceedings.
Enrile said the doctrine “verba legis non est recedendum” (which means “from the words of a statute there should be no departure”) quoted by the Supreme Court in its decision to limit Congress representation to the JBC to only one representative, should also be applied to the Supreme Court and even to the executive branch’s representative in the council.
“Why apply it only to Congress when the Constitution says the Chief Justice is the ex officio chair of the JBC?” Enrile asked.
He added: “The secretary of justice is also an ex officio member of the JBC, according to constitutional law. Why is she being represented by someone else, which is not authorized under the Constitution?”
Like Carpio, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima had inhibited herself from the JBC proceedings as she was among those being considered for the post.
Appointed ex officio chair of the JBC was Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta, while Undersecretary Michael Musngi from Malacañang’s office on special concerns had taken over De Lima’s seat at the JBC.
Enrile said that the President’s “appointment of a Chief Justice without any JBC action or recommendation is defensible, given the situation we are in.”
‘Erroneous, absurd’
Tupas described the high court’s decision as “erroneous” and “absurd” and warned of certain “repercussions” if the JBC proceeds with voting without congressional representation.
“It would be more prudent for them to really wait until this issue is resolved,” Tupas said. “How can we give up the representation of Congress? We’re bicameral in nature.”
Among all JBC members, only Senate and House representatives were “directly elected by the people,” he added.
The JBC yesterday finished its interviews of applicants for the post of Chief Justice after CJ Renato Corona’s impeachment last month rendered the position vacant.
At the conclusion of the interviews, Peralta thanked the aspirants for being frank and candid, and the media for covering the event.
“You are the instruments in making known to the [people] that they can be active participants to the process,” the JBC chair said.
Peralta also thanked those who showed interest in the JBC interviews by sending questions via Twitter, Facebook and e-mail. With a report from Jerome Aning
