Sereno’s admin orders questioned

Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno. INQUIRER FILE PHOTO/LYN RILLON

A justice of the Supreme Court has asked her colleagues to review several administrative orders made by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, including delays in filling up key positions in the judiciary, appointment of a Philippine Judicial Academy (Philja) official and provision for travel allowances of her staff.

In a five-page memorandum circulated among members of the high court last week, Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro told her colleagues that Sereno’s orders should have prior approval by the court en banc being a collegial body as required under the rules.

De Castro said “it is imperative that the Court addresses the long delay in the filling-up of the key positions in the Court which is prejudicial to the best interest of the service.”

She particularly cited the positions for SC deputy clerk of court and chief attorney, which have been vacant for three years and eight months already as well as the two positions for assistant court administrator which have been vacant for four years and six months.

De Castro said Associate Justice Jose Perez, before his retirement in 2016, asked the Chief Justice to act on the vacancies.

“The request remained unheeded by the Chief Justice even up to now. The vacancy in the other Assistant Court Administrator position has not been posted at all up to this time,” De Castro said in her memorandum.

She asked the full court to now “order the posting of the long vacant positions and adopt guidelines to require expeditious posting and filling-up of vacant positions to serve the best interest of the service.”

In the same memorandum, De Castro also questioned Sereno’s grant of foreign travel allowance to members of her staff without required approval from the en banc (full court).

She said Sereno’s staff members were being given travel allowances even when their trips abroad were on “official time,” which should not involve expenditure of public funds.

“The Chief Justice has granted to the members of her staff travel allowance for foreign travel without the requisite Court en banc approval, which every justice has to secure to be authorized to travel abroad on official business,” De Castro added.

Citing the travel in particular of one of her staff members, De Castro said: “The Chief Justice granted foreign travel allowances charged to the Supreme Court funds without Court approval. The same is true with the foreign travel of the other staff in the OCJ (Office of the Chief Justice).”

“The Court has not delegated its power to approve authority to travel abroad on ‘official business’ of court officials and personnel which entitles them to their salaries per diems and allowances as distinguished from ‘official time,’ which entitles those concerned only to their salaries for the duration of the authorized travel abroad,” De Castro’s memorandum stated.

She urged her fellow justices to collegially “impose compliance with the requisite Court resolution approving foreign travel of court officials and personnel on official business before the expenditure of Supreme Court funds is authorized for said travel.”

Lastly, De Castro urged the en banc (full court) to review the appointment of Atty. Brenda Jay Mendoza as Philja chief of office for the Philippine Mediation Center, which she said violated their Administrative Order No. 33-2008 that required the appointment for the post to be approved by the SC collegially.

She said Mendoza’s appointment in June 2016 was approved only by Sereno and two other senior justices through a memorandum that did not pass through the full court.

“Please note that the Memorandum does not mention the name of the applicant to the position recommended by the Philippine Judicial Academy. No Philja board resolution recommending Atty. Mendoza as PMC chief was submitted to the Court for action unlike in the appointment of PMC chief [Geraldine] Econg. Hence, Administrative Order No. 33-2008 was not followed in the appointment of Atty. Mendoza,” De Castro explained.

For this, she asked her colleagues in the SC “to review the appointment of Atty. Mendoza” as chief of PMC.

This is not the first time that De Castro questioned an issuance made by Sereno. In 2012, the high court revoked the Nov. 27, 2012 resolution issued by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno allowing the reopening of the Regional Court Administration Office (RCAO) without their approval.

De Castro also wrote a memorandum questioning Sereno’s order.

It was also De Castro who questioned Sereno’s order then. In her memorandum, she said “the Chief Justice cannot deprive the high court of its constitutional duty to exercise administrative supervision over all courts and their personnel and the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) of its statutory duty under Presidential Decree 828 to assist the Supreme Court in the exercise of said power of administrative supervision.”