7 JUSTICES IMPEACHMENT: MANILA – Impeach raps vs Supreme Court justices sufficient in form
Justice Commitee Doy Leachon presides the hearing on 7 justices yesterday at house of Rep.
.
.
MANILA, Philippines — The House of Representatives’ committee on justice yesterday found the impeachment complaints against seven Supreme Court (SC) justices sufficient in form, paving the way for another hearing on the petitions’ substance.
The committee, chaired by Mindoro Oriental Rep. Salvador Leachon, voted 21-0 to find the complaints compliant with the requirements of form as prescribed under its impeachment rules.
The requirements are: the petitions must be notarized and that the petitioners have personal knowledge of their allegations or that these are based on authentic documents.
The complainants are three opposition congressmen: Edcel Lagman of Albay, Teodoro Baguilat Jr. of Ifugao and Gary Alejano of party-list group Magdalo. Of the three, Baguilat was conspicuously absent at yesterday’s first hearing on their petitions.
A fourth potential filer, Tom Villarin of Akbayan, was listed as a complainant but failed to sign the petitions.
Villarin told the justice committee that he was in Davao City when his colleagues filed the petitions and that he pleaded to be included as a petitioner but Leachon ruled that the panel would violate its rules if it heeded his plea.
Leachon said no complainant could be added to any complaint once the House has already referred such petition to the committee on justice.
Upon motion of deputy minority leader and Ako Bicol Rep. Alfredo Garbin Jr., the committee consolidated the seven separate impeachment cases Lagman and his colleagues filed against the seven justices.
The panel later voted to set another hearing for Sept. 11 to give its members time to read the complaints and their supporting documents before they vote on issue of sufficiency of substance.
Facing impeachment are newly appointed Chief Justice Teresita de Castro and Associate Justices Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Andres Reyes Jr., Francis Jardeleza, Noel Tijam and Alexander Gesmundo.
The seven, together with then justice and now Ombudsman Samuel Martires, voted to oust former chief justice Maria Lourdes Sereno by favoring the quo warranto case Solicitor General Jose Calida filed against her.
Calida claimed that Sereno was not qualified even if the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) had nominated her.
Addressing the justice committee, Lagman said they filed the complaints against the seven because the justices violated the Constitution in removing Sereno by “usurping the sole power of Congress to impeach the highest officials of the republic.”
They also “arrogated” the sole power of the JBC to vet applicants to the SC, he said.
Aside from violating the Charter, five justices – De Castro, Peralta, Bersamin, Jardeleza and Tijam – were accused of betraying public trust for refusing to inhibit in the Calida quo warranto case “despite their admitted persistent ill will, bias and prejudice against” Sereno.
Lagman said the decision of the justices in removing Sereno violated not only the Constitution but also the “requisite impartiality and judiciousness of neutral magistrates.”
“The decision of the respondent justices is not only a mere ‘error in judgment,’ but a malevolent, spiteful and orchestrated decision to oust a Chief Justice against whom the majority of the respondent justices have admitted continuing ill will, bias and prejudice,” he said.
Lagman said the SC misinterpreted the Charter’s provision that impeachable officers “may” be removed through impeachment proceedings by reading it as allowing another process of removal.
He stressed that such officers could be ousted only through impeachment.
Lagman urged the House to reclaim from the SC its sole power to initiate the ouster of any impeachable official through the impeachment process.
All photographs, news, editorials, opinions, information, data, others have been taken from the Internet..aseanews.net | [email protected] / For comments, Email to : Aseanews.Net |
