SC sets conditions on oral arguments on ouster plea vs. Sereno

The Supreme Court (SC) has set conditions for Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno after it granted her motion to hold oral arguments on the ouster plea against the chief magistrate.

The oral arguments on Solicitor General Jose Calida's petition for quo warranto against Sereno will push through upon her personal appearance at the proceedings, which will be held in Baguio City on April 10.

Apart from her attendance, Sereno is required by her fellow justices to "testify under oath" and "affirm and verify under oath the truth and veracity of the allegations in the Comment filed by counsels supposedly on her behalf."

The SC also wants Sereno to "expressly acknowledge this Court's jurisdiction to act upon the relief prayed for, if any."

"Her failure or refusal to so appear shall result in the cancellation of the scheduled oral argument," an April 3 notice of resolution from the tribunal said.

Spokespersons for Sereno have confirmed that she will attend the oral arguments to present her side on Calida's petition, but without prejudice to her challenge to the SC's jurisdiction to hear and decide the case.

Sereno earlier sought the dismissal of the pleading for lack of jurisdiction and of merit.

Sereno had insisted that impeachable officers are only allowed by the Constitution to be removed from their posts via impeachment.

Section 2, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution says: "The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust."

The top judge is also facing possible impeachment at the House of Representatives and a possible trial at the Senate. Her predecessor, the late Renato Corona, was convicted by the Senate in 2012.

Further, Sereno wants the quo warranto plea dismissed because the supposed one-year prescriptive period for filing it had, according to her, already lapsed by the time the Solicitor General lodged it at the SC.

Calida's petition seeks Sereno's removal from office for alleged lack of integrity when she supposedly failed to submit the necessary number of Statements of Assets, Liabilites and Net Worth (SALN) when she was applying for the chief justice position in 2012.

Calida and Sereno are required by SC guidelines to limit their presentation for oral argument on the following issues, among several others:

• Whether or not the SC can assume jurisdiction and give due course to the instant petition for quo warranto against Sereno, an impeachable officer and, against whom an impeachment complaint has already been filed with the House of Representatives;
• Whether or not the petition may be dismissed outright on the ground of prescription;
• Whether or not Sereno can be granted relief by the SC considering her refusal to recognize its jurisdiction on the case;
• Whether or not Sereno filed her SALN as required by the Constitution, law, implementing regulations, and the Judicial and Bar Council rules in relation to her application for the chief justice position;
• Whether or not the failure to file the SALN will invalidate her appointment as chief justice; and
• Whether or not the petition for quo warranto should be granted.

— RSJ/MDM, GMA News