SC allows justices to testify but only on adminstrative matters
Personnel of the Supreme Court may appear before the House justice committee hearing the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, but they can discuss only administrative matters, the high court ruled on Tuesday.
While all of the 14 magistrates who took part in the tribunal’s weekly full-court session gave their consent, the court issued guidelines that court officers must observe at the impeachment hearing on the House justice committee, said Supreme Court spokesperson Theodore Te.
Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio presided over the deliberations after Sereno recused herself, according to Te.
Te said the court officials — except Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro — were allowed to discuss only administrative matters and not the actual deliberations of the tribunal.
“As regards the testimony on administrative matters, those who are invited to testify on administrative matters may do so if they wish,” he told a press briefing.
Te said the high court was granting court personnel clearance if they so wished to appear and testify on administrative matters.
Committee invitations
Aside from De Castro and Te, also invited by the justice committee were Associate Justice Noel Tijam, Supreme Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez, Clerk of Court Felipa Anama and Chief Judicial Staff Officer Charlotte Labayani.
In the impeachment complaint, Sereno is accused of, among other allegations, culpable violation of the Constitution for falsifying Supreme Court resolutions and a temporary restraining order (TRO), for delaying action on petitions for retirement benefits and for failing to truthfully declare her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth.
Sereno is also accused of manipulating the Judicial Bar Council and its short lists.
De Castro has been identified by lawyer Lorenzo Gadon, who filed the impeachment complaint, as the source of a newspaper article regarding the Chief Justice’s supposed illegal act of falsifying a court decision.
‘Most explosive witness’
De Castro, however, has denied being the source of the story written by Manila Times reporter Jomar Canlas, who himself belied Gadon’s claim during the committee hearing on Monday.
In the House of Representatives, the chair of the impeachment panel welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court to allow the “most explosive witness and resource person,” De Castro, to testify against Sereno.
Oriental Mindoro Rep. Reynaldo Umali said the presence of De Castro, whose attendance in Wednesday’s hearing was confirmed to him by her staff, was the perfect witness to
substantiate the allegations made by Gadon.
“Justice De Castro is the most explosive witness and resource person to give us all the facts we have been wanting to elicit by reason of personal knowledge and not only authentic records,” Umali said.
TRO case
Te said De Castro was authorized to speak only about the TRO on the case involving a group of senior citizens and “the exchange of communications between herself and the Chief Justice not on any matters pertaining to deliberations of the case on the merits.”
“On the clustering case involving the Judicial and Bar Council, Justice De Castro has been authorized by the court to discuss the merits of her main decision, but not the deliberations that went into that decision,” Te said.
Moreover, De Castro was allowed to talk about her concurring opinion in a case involving the appointment of Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza, but “again not the deliberation that went into the decision,” the high court spokesperson said.
De Castro’s testimony was sought by Gadon to shed light on an internal memorandum she issued in July questioning some of the actions Sereno had taken without getting full-court approval, including matters on official travel and judicial appointments.
She will also be asked about the charge that Sereno “falsified” a TRO drafted by De Castro involving the case of a disqualified party-list group of senior citizens, according to Umali.
