LOOK: Sereno’s motions for inhibition vs 4 SC justices

Four separate motions for inhibition have been filed by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno against four of her colleagues in the Supreme Court.

Sought for their recusal are Associate Justices Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza and Noel Tijam. All of them testified against the Chief Justice in her impeachment case pending before the House of Representatives.

The four justices also participated in the so-called “Red Monday” protest in the SC that called for her resignation.

Peralta, in his testimony in Congress, said Sereno should have been disqualified for the top judicial post in 2012 due to her failure to submit to the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) her Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth for the years that she was employed as professor at the University of the Philippines.

“The Chief Justice has good reason to believe that he (Peralta) may have prejudged the merits of the quo warranto petition and that he may already have formed an opinion that the Chief Justice should have been disqualified to be nominated as Chief Justice,” Sereno said in her 14-page motion seeking Peralta’s inhibition.

In the case of Jardeleza, Sereno noted that she was accused of manipulating the shortlist of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to exclude him from the shortlist of aspirants to the high court.

“There is reasonable basis to conclude from Justice Jardeleza’s testimony that he harbored ill feelings towards the Chief Justice as a consequence of the latter’s challenge to his integrity during the nomination process for the Associate Justice position (vice Hon. Justice Roberto A. Abad) in 2014,” Sereno pointed out in her 18-page motion for Jardeleza’s recusal.

During the House Committee on Justice hearing, Jardeleza also accused Sereno of committing treason and characterized her actions in the nomination process as “inhumane” and “not of a normal person.”

On the other hand, Tijam said Sereno’s refusal to participate in the impeachment process in Congress, “she is clearly liable for culpable violation of the Constitution.” Tijam confirmed that he made the statement when he appeared before the justice committee. Tijam is the justice-in-charge of the quo warranto case against the Chief Justice.

Sereno, meanwhile, said that Bersamin has “exhibited bias and animosity” towards her when, during his testimony before the House panel, he alluded to the Chief Justice as a “dictator” as he expressed his personal resentment over her manner of leadership which, according to him, was against the collegial nature of the SC.

In the pleadings she filed, Sereno clarified that her move seeking recusal of four justices was without prejudice to her contention that the SC has no jurisdiction over the quo warranto case.

The Sereno camp said a separate motion for inhibition will be filed against another Justice either on Thursday or on Friday.

Here are the front pages of the separate motions for inhibitions filed at the Supreme Court.