Number of charges vs Sereno divides House committee | Inquirer News
ARTICLES OF IMPEACHMENT

Number of charges vs Sereno divides House committee

/ 07:02 AM March 14, 2018

The House of Representatives justice committee has postponed to next week the approval of the articles of impeachment against Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno because of disagreements on the specific allegations she would be formally charged with.

“The articles of impeachment were not finalized because we could not agree on how many (charges) would be included,” said Rep. Reynaldo Umali, justice committee chair.

He said other committee members “want this to be really comprehensive to show that this is really a strong case.”

Article continues after this advertisement

The justice committee was originally scheduled to approve its report on March 14, but the hearing was moved to March 19.

FEATURED STORIES

Plenary vote

Umali said the committee report was expected to be submitted to the plenary next week.

Article continues after this advertisement

He said the charges against Sereno that were sure to be included in the articles of impeachment included her alleged failure to file her statements of assets, liabilities and net worth and her alleged underpayment of at least P2-million value-added taxes from 2005 to 2008 on attorney’s fees paid by the government for her handling of its dispute with the Philippine International Air Terminals Co. Inc.

Article continues after this advertisement

Umali also mentioned corruption allegations involving the purchase of a bulletproof Land Cruiser and the use of accommodations in “opulent” hotels.

Article continues after this advertisement

Psychiatric test

While Sereno’s allegedly poor performance in her psychiatric evaluation during the selection process for Chief Justice in 2012 would not form one of the grounds for her impeachment, Umali said it would be used to explain her supposed behavior.

Article continues after this advertisement

The Psychological Association of the Philippines said in
a March 2 statement that applying the evaluation to legislative proceedings five years later would be a “misuse of those results.”

It said it would be “misleading” to describe Sereno as having “failed” her evaluation.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS:

No tags found for this post.
Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.