MANILA, Philippines – With doors slammed at the House of Representatives on her right to be represented by counsel, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno’s hopes now hinge on the Senate, which is mandated by the Constitution to conduct the trial if she gets impeached at the lower chamber.
A total of 30 members voted against allowing Sereno’s lawyers to speak and cross-examine lawyer Lorenzo Gadon, the complainant in the impeachment case, at the resumption of the impeachment proceedings Wednesday, November 22. Only four panel members — Reps. Kit Belmonte of Quezon City, Rav Rocamora of Siquijor, Kaka Bag-ao of Dinagat Island and Lawrence Fortun of Agusan del Norte – favored the appeal of the lawyers.
The House panel also voted 30-3, denying the request of non-members of the committee to be allowed to participate in the discussions.
The impeachment complaint against Sereno, which accuses her of culpable violation of the Constitution, betrayal of public trust, corruption and other high crimes, was endorsed by 25 House members.
Sereno was a no-show at the impeachment hearing, but sent a legal team led by lawyer Alexander Poblador. Seeking the permission of the committee, through Belmonte, the lawyers left the proceedings after the voting.
Poblador said “we will just face them at the Senate” and would “look into all options” available.
“We are not accepting defeat. We are confident in the strength of the defense of the Chief Justice,” Poblador said in an interview.
“We know this is a long process, but at this stage of the proceeding, we don’t really expect to be effective in defending the Chief Justice because we have been denied the right to cross examine, which is provided in their own rules of impeachment,” he added.
Poblador, who served as one of the private prosecutors in the 2012 trial that removed the late Chief Justice Renato Corona from the Supreme Court, said he hopes the process would now be expedited, especially since the justice panel appeared to believe the complainant lawyer Lorenzo Gadon.
“If they believe that Gadon has evidence, if they believe his complaint is sufficient in form, substance and has ground, why go through this hearing if not just to provide evidence, which Gadon seems not to have,” he said.
“Why not go to the Senate where we can have this trial, which will be consistent with the rights of the Chief Justice?” Poblador added.
CJ will not step down, to ‘fight this to the end’
Despite the impeachment case, Poblador said Sereno will not resign and “fight this to the end.”
In favoring Sereno’s right to counsel, Belmonte cited Section 6 of the House’s rules of impeachment, which provides for cross examination.
“Therefore, the constitutional rights of the respondent or the accused applies, ibig sabihin, may right to counsel. Ke-maglulupa, magsasaka o pinakamagaling na abugado ng Pilipinas, may karapatan na ire-present, may right to counsel,” he said.
Farinas said the hearings would allow the justice committee to determine if there are “enough evidence” to impeach Sereno.
He said that when Corona was impeached in 2012, he was not afforded a preliminary hearing at the House, because the complaint, signed by more than one-third of the House membership, was directly sent to the Senate for trial.
Fariñas, who served as one of the public prosecutors in the Corona impeachment, said he did not sign the complaint because “medyo masama ang pagkagawa [it was badly written].”
“In this present case, there were many who want to do it again (send the case directly to the Senate), but I dissuaded them. Let us go to investigation first. Ang nangyari, finile agad, nangangapa kami dun (What happened in the Corona case was that they filed it right awat, so we ended up grappling with a weak case during trial),” he said.
“We whittled the allegations [against Corona] to two, and this is what will happen here if we are in a hurry. We want a polished articles of impeachment this time,” Farinas added.
Accuser Gadon grilled
During the hearing, Gadon was made to present his allegations against Sereno. His complaint contained 27 alleged impeachable acts committed by the chief magistrate.
Among the allegations discussed were the Resolution dated November 27, 2012 in A.M. No. 12-11-9-SC (Re: Opening the Regional Court Administrative Office in Region 7) and the Letter of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno to Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro sometime May/June 2013, admitting that she deliberately changed the recommendation made by the latter in the TRO in Coalition of Associations of Senior Citizens in the Philippines v. COMELEC (G.R. Nos. 206844-45 and 206982, May 28, 2013).
Several lawmakers grilled Gadon for not having personal knowledge on the issues he raised against the chief magistrate.
Gadon said Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-De Castro was willing to testify and back his claims.
However, when asked if he had personally talked with De Castro, he said he communicated through a friend.
“It’s important to establish your facts, you must have done your homework before facing here,” Umali said.
1-Ang Edukasyon partylist Rep. Salvador Belaro Jr. said the allegations should not be “just hearsay” and “must be grounded on facts.”
Bag-ao also added, “You always point to Associate Justice De Castro, who is the real complainant here?”
The allegations vs Sereno
The Gadon complaint alleges the following:
Acts constituting culpable violation of Constitution:
-She falsified the Resolution of the Supreme Court in A.M. No. 12-11-9-SC.
-She falsified the Temporary Restraining Order of the Supreme Court in G.R. Nos. 206844-45.
-She falsified the Resolution of the Supreme Court in A.M. No. 16-08-04-SC.
-She delayed action on the numerous Petitions for Retirement Benefits of Justices and Judges, and the surviving spouses of deceased Justices and Judges.
-She manipulated and thereafter delayed the resolution of A.M. No. 17-06-02-SC (the request of the Secretary of Justice to transfer the Maute cases outside of Mindanao) after realizing that she lost in the voting.
-She failed to truthfully disclose her Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth or SALN.
-She manipulated the shortlist of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to exclude then Solicitor General Francis H. Jardeleza, for personal and political reasons, thereby disgracing then Sol. Gen. Jardeleza, and curtailing the President’s power to appoint him.
-She manipulated the shortlist of the JBC for the six (6) vacancies in the Sandiganbayan, for personal and political reasons, thereby limiting the President’s power to appoint the Justices of the Sandiganbayan.
-She manipulated the shortlist of the JBC for the two (2) vacancies in the Supreme Court, and failed to heed the pronouncements of the Court in Aguinaldo v. Aquino, thereby impairing and curtailing the President’s power to appoint the Justices of the Supreme Court.
-She lied and made it appear that “several justices” requested that they do away with voting for recommendees to the Supreme Court, when in fact not one Justice requested for it.
-She manipulated the JBC, especially its four (4) regular members, effectively destroying the JBC as a constitutional body mandated to fairly and impartially screen and nominate applicants to the Judiciary.
Acts constituting corruption:
-She used public funds to finance her extravagant and lavish lifestyle by ordering the purchase of a brand-new luxurious Toyota Land Cruiser 2017 model as her personal vehicle, amounting to more than Five Million Pesos.
-She used public funds to stay in opulent hotels when attending conferences in the Philippines and abroad, and flying on business or first class together with her staff and security.
-She used public funds to flaunt her extravagance by unnecessarily bringing a huge entourage of lawyers in her supposed official foreign trips.
Acts constituting other high crimes:
-She obstructed justice by ordering the Muntinlupa Judges not to issue warrants of arrest against Senator Leila M. De Lima.
-She perverted justice by meeting the Presiding Justice and Associate Justices of the Court of Appeals and instructing them not to comply with the processes of the House of Representatives and to immediately question its processes before the Supreme Court.
-She failed to report her extortionate attorney’s fees and pay the appropriate taxes therefor.
-She embellished her Personal Data Sheet (PDS) in her application for the Judiciary to overstate her credentials.
Acts constituting betrayal of public trust:
-She hired an Information Technology consultant with an excessive compensation without public bidding, in contravention of existing laws, Commission on Audit (COA) rules, and public policy.
-She sent a strongly-worded but misplaced reply to President Rodrigo Roa Duterte on the Judges linked to drugs thereby inviting a head-on collision between the Presidency and the Judiciary.
-She prevented the Justices of the Court of Appeals to do a courtesy call on President Rodrigo Roa Duterte.
-She attacked the imposition of Martial Law in a commencement address, while the validity of Martial Law was still pending before the Supreme Court, and later continued to participate in the Court’s deliberations.
-She issued a Joint Statement with the Presiding Justice of the Court of Appeals regarding CA-GR SP No. 151029, which can very well be elevated to the Supreme Court.
-She practiced favoritism by allowing key positions in the Supreme Court to remain unfilled for a long period of time in order to wait for her staff to qualify, to the detriment of the service and great demoralization of qualified Court employees.
-She appointed a key official without authority or approval of the Court en banc, in violation of Court-established rules and the Constitution.
-She gave her newly-hired staff foreign travels and granted them travel allowances for their foreign travels without authority or approval of the Court en banc, in violation of Court-established rules and the Constitution.
-She usurped the mandate of the Court en banc by arrogating to herself alone the running of the Supreme Court and the Judiciary, thereby destroying the Supreme Court as a collegial body.
