The camp of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno said on Friday that the House justice committee should just dismiss the impeachment complaint filed by lawyer Lorenzo Gadon as it was “purely based on hearsay and perjurious statements.”
Lawyer Josa Deinla, a spokesperson of Sereno, criticized the House panel, chaired by Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali, for purportedly substantiating the “hearsay allegations” that Gadon used as basis to impeach Sereno.
Sereno’s camp warned that the committee might be held liable for tolerating the crime of perjury committed by the accuser.
“The Constitution requires that, at the minimum, the complainant in any case of impeachment must have personal knowledge of the facts allegedly constituting an impeachable offense,” Deinla said in a statement.
“The entire nation witnessed how Gadon failed to truthfully tell the committee that he had personal knowledge of each of the allegation he presented to Congress. We strongly feel that a dismissal of the impeachment complaint—which should have not been entertained in the first place—is in order,” she stressed.
For instance, Gadon’s claim that the allegations were based on his personal knowledge or on authentic records and public documents was challenged during the hearing.
Gadon admitted that he found out about Sereno’s alleged falsification of a court document in 2013 through second-hand information.
Later, Associate Justice Teresita De Castro denied releasing “any information, report, or document regarding the work of the Supreme Court” to Gadon’s source, newspaper reporter Jomar Canlas.
“No less than the Rep. Rey Umali, chair of the House Committee on Justice, publicly admitted that Gadon may be liable for perjury for his false statements made under oath,” Deinla noted. “We are confident, as this hearing unfolds, Mr. Gadon will perjure himself multiple times because he doesn’t have solid and strong evidence to support his complaint.”
Umali’s committee has sent out invitations for Canlas and De Castro to appear in the next hearing and shed light on Gadon’s claims.
Asked to react on the possible perjury charge, Gadon said his statement could not be considered perjurious because “the documents are existing already.” /kga