MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) is set to decide on the quo warranto petition filed by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) seeking to nullify the appointment of Chief Justice on-leave Maria Lourdes Sereno over her alleged non-filing of Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) in May.
This was bared by Acting Chief Justice and Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.
“We hope to finish it by end of month, by next month we should able to decide it,” Carpio told reporters in an interview after the launching of the new app called Justice PH at the Quezon City Hall of Justice on Thursday.
The whole month of May is supposed to be for decision writing by the magistrates. However, the high court has set a special en banc session on May to come up with a ruling on the quo warranto case.
Sereno camp: Why the rush?
Lawyer Josalee Deinla, one of Sereno’s spokespersons, meanwhile, said that SC en banc is supposed to be on break after summer its session in Baguio and is scheduled to resume sessions in June.
“We cannot help but ask why the rush? The SC is supposed to be on break after its last en banc session on April 24 in Baguio. They are on recess in May and are supposed to resume session on June 5. The quo warranto is an important case which if granted will upend our justice system as we know it. The SC has not even heard the side of any of intervenors,” Deinla said when sought for a comment.
Last April 10, the high court held oral arguments on the quo warranto petition filed by the OSG against Sereno, seeking to nullify her appointment over her alleged non-filing of her SALN.
Sereno faced her probing colleagues at the Supreme Court in Baguio City last April 10, a first in Philippine history.
Sereno was even required by her colleagues to answer their questions under oath.
The submission of the SALN was a JBC requirement when she applied for the associate justice post in 2010 and for the chief justice post in 2012, Calida said.
While admitting that Sereno is an impeachable officer, Calida said she may still be removed from office through a quo warranto petition.
He said the offenses that may warrant the filing of a quo warranto petition are different from the offenses that would warrant the filing of an impeachment complaint.
During the oral arguments on the quo warranto petition, Carpio directed both parties to submit their respective memoranda and pertinent documents on or before April 20.
Sereno, currently on indefinite leave from office, has earlier sought the dismissal of the case, arguing that the SC has no jurisdiction and authority to remove her from office because the 1987 Constitution provides that she could only be ousted by impeachment in Congress as an impeachable official.
Citing Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution, she said impeachable officials — including herself and all justices of the SC — may only be removed from office upon impeachment by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate, sitting as an impeachment court. (PNA)
