GMA wants to appoint next Sandiganbayan chief
By Marvin Sy (The Philippine Star) Updated April 06, 2010 12:00 AM
|
| |
MANILA, Philippines – President Arroyo is poised to make another controversial appointment, this time to
replace Sandiganbayan Presiding Justice Norberto Geraldez, who died barely a month after heading the
court under which administration foes want her tried for corruption after the end of her presidency.
Malacañang said it is possible for the President to appoint a new Sandiganbayan presiding justice after the
death of Geraldez last Sunday from pancreatic cancer complications. He was 60.
The President, under the Constitution, is barred from appointing officials 60 days before the elections – or
beginning March 10 – and until the end of her term on June 30.
Supreme Court spokesman Midas Marquez earlier said that a recent ruling by the high tribunal allowing Mrs.
Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice does not cover other appointments in the judiciary.
Deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar said that the President would “do all she can and all that she’s
expected and in fact mandated to do in this particular situation.”
Olivar said Justice Secretary Alberto Agra and Chief Presidential Legal Counsel Raul Victorino were advising
the President on the matter.
Olivar hinted that the vacancy in the post of Sandiganbayan presiding justice was an issue that could be
subject to the same guidelines on appointments during an election period as interpreted by Agra.
Agra earlier claimed that appointments in the judiciary were exempted from the 60-day election ban under
the Constitution.
He argued that the SC ruling allowing the President to appoint the next chief justice was an affirmation of the
position taken by the government.
“The Supreme Court reasoned, among others, that the establishment of the Judicial and Bar Council and
their subjecting the nomination and screening of candidates for judicial positions to the unhurried and
deliberate prior process of the JBC, ensured that there would no longer be midnight appointments to the
judiciary,” Agra said.
Olivar said the President would do whatever is required of her “subject to whatever legal constraints (that)
apply in this case.”
“If this is the position that Justice Secretary Agra determines (and) also covers this particular case in terms
of the facts involved, then we can expect the appointment to be made (by the President),” Olivar said.
The sudden vacancy in the Sandiganbayan came amid the controversy sparked by Malacañang’s insistence
on appointing the successor of SC Chief Justice Reynato Puno despite an election ban on appointments.
The government has maintained that the ban only covers appointments to the executive branch and not the
judiciary.
Malacañang recently announced several new presidential appointments, which drew widespread criticism,
particularly from the political opposition.
Malacañang earlier claimed the appointments were made before the March 10 deadline.
Liberal Party standard-bearer Sen. Benigno Aquino III said that if he becomes president, he would void all of
the illegal appointments made by Mrs. Arroyo in his first 90 days in office.
But Olivar said Aquino should first have to prove that the appointments were illegal.
“We always maintained that the appointments made by the President, including the latest bunch of
appointments, are all legal for various reasons, but all of them conformed to the requirements of law,” Olivar
said.
“If Senator Aquino has a different opinion about this and if he wishes to use up his first 100 days focused on
things like this then the first thing he has to do of course is to prove that in fact these appointments were
illegal,” he added.
Official mourning
The Philippine flag at the Sandiganbayan will remain at half-mast for the next six days as justices, lawyers,
and employees of the anti-graft court mourn the death of Geraldez.
They also offered yesterday a minute of silent prayer after the flag ceremony and placed a piece of black
cloth in front of the Sandiganbayan Centennial Building in Quezon City.
Necrological services for Geraldez will be held at the Heritage Memorial Park at 6 p.m. tomorrow to give
Sandiganbayan personnel a chance to pay their last respects.
Executive Clerk of Court Renato Bocar said he had known Geraldez since they were law school classmates
at San Beda College.
“He was low-key. He used to sit at the back of the classroom, a silent individual,” Bocar recalled, expressing
dismay that Sandiganbayan employees had not been given much of a chance to really get to know him.
“He would not have been appointed to highest position if he was not bright and qualified,” he told The STAR.
The Office of the Ombudsman also expressed its condolences to the family of Geraldez.
“We sympathize and deeply condole with the family of a partner in the justice system. We grieve the loss of a
good person and magistrate. His demise is a big loss to the cause of justice,” Assistant Ombudsman and
spokesperson Jose de Jesus Jr. said. - With Michael Punongbayan
|
| |
JBC meets today on chief justice selection
By Edu Punay (The Philippine Star) Updated April 05, 2010 12:00 AM
|
| |
MANILA, Philippines - After getting the go-signal from the Supreme Court, the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC)
is set to continue today the nomination process for the position of chief justice in a meeting in Baguio City.
Justice Secretary Alberto Agra, ex-officio member of the JBC, said the collegial body would follow the order of
the High Court to proceed with the screening of the six remaining candidates and prepare the shortlist of
nominees to be submitted to President Arroyo.
Agra said they would ask Senior Associate Justices Antonio Carpio and Conchita Carpio–Morales to
reconsider their positions.
The two justices accepted the nomination but said they would reject an appointment from President Arroyo
because it would violate the constitutional ban on midnight appointments during the election period.
Agra said the two justices must reconsider their position in the light of the SC ruling allowing Mrs. Arroyo to
appoint the next chief justice.
“If they keep their condition, I think they should not be included in the shortlist that will be submitted to the
President,” Agra said.
Delisting the two would leave the other four nominees in the shortlist – Senior Associate Justice Renato
Corona, Associate Justices Arturo Brion and Teresita Leonardo-de
Castro, and Sandiganbayan Senior Justice Edilberto Sandoval.
The law requires at least three names in the shortlist to be submitted before the President.
Agra said another issue the JBC would resolve today is whether it would set public interviews to the
candidates.
Agra noted each member of the judiciary who are candidates for the position of chief justice is traditionally
exempted from the required public interviews for candidates.
All six contenders have already been interviewed by the JBC anyway before they were appointed to their
respective posts in the judiciary, he explained.
Agra said the JBC would also decide on the allegations against some aspirants.
Agra said the panel could possibly decide to immediately start the selection process for the vacancy for the
position of associate justice in the SC that would be left vacant by the appointment of the next chief
magistrate upon the retirement of Chief Justice Reynato Puno on May 17.
Agra stressed the JBC would proceed in the nomination process since the position of chief justice is not
covered by the constitutional ban on midnight appointments.
Agra added the JBC has not set a timeline for the deliberation, but gave assurance they will submit the
shortlist on or before May 17.
Chief Justice Puno will preside over the JBC meeting as the body’s ex-officio chairman. Puno earlier
inhibited from the deliberations since the process involves the appointment of his successor.
Apart from Puno and Agra, other members of the JBC include Sen. Francis Escudero, Quezon City Rep.
Matias Defensor Jr., retired SC justice Regino Hermosisima Jr., University of Santo Tomas Dean Emeritus
Amado Dimayuga, Justice Aurora Santiago-Lagman and lawyer J. Conrado Castro representing the
Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP).
The JBC earlier decided to await the ruling on the petitions before the SC on whether the President is
allowed under the Constitution to appoint the next chief justice notwithstanding the ban on appointments
during the election period.
By a vote of 9-1-3, the high court ruled the ban on appointments under Article VII Section 15 of the
Constitution does not apply to positions in the SC.
In its comment, the JBC said it would submit to whatever ruling the SC would render on the case.
“Since the Honorable Supreme Court is the final interpreter of the Constitution, the JBC will be guided by its
decision,” the JBC said.
‘Judicial indiscretion’
A senior lawmaker said the nine justices of the SC who allowed President Arroyo to appoint the next chief
justice committed a “judicial indiscretion.”
Nueva Ecija Rep. Edno Joson said the 1987 Constitution does not have any ambiguity on this matter,
reiterating the election ban two months prior to the May 10 polls until the end of Mrs. Arroyo’s term on June
30.
“I call it judicial indiscretion or grave abuse of discretion, which amounts to culpable violation of the
Constitution, making them liable for impeachment,” Joson warned.
He said the March 17 ruling can also be considered another act of “judicial legislation,” like the SC decision
that forced the House of Representatives to accommodate 32 more party-list representatives without budget
allocations, which Joson claimed had modified an established party-list formula.
“They (SC) cannot change or modify constitutional commission’s intent and allude unto themselves
sovereign powers. They cannot also be partisan or political in their decisions, otherwise, the essence of
justice which is independence and integrity will be lost,” Joson stressed.
Joson claimed “only a miracle” can reverse the SC decision.
Former Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo earlier warned the SC ruling is tantamount to amending the 1987
Constitution.
Marcelo said the high court virtually altered the Constitution when it decided to rule in favor of Mrs. Arroyo in
allowing her to appoint the next chief justice amid the constitutional ban.
“It is a very clear violation of the 1987 Constitution because of the absolute prohibition,” Marcelo said.
In a related development, more groups of lawyers submitted last minute appeals on the decision just before
the Lenten break.
In two separate motions for reconsideration, the Philippine Bar Association (PBA) and chapters of the IBP in
Southern Luzon and Eastern Visayas both argued that the High Court committed an error in directing the
JBC to submit the shortlist of nominees.
The PBA argued the JBC, in submitting the shortlist, in effect allowed the President to “execute a culpable
violation of the Constitution and the commission of an election offense” considering that “the constitutional
ban on appointments is already in effect.”
Marcelo led a group of petitioners alleging the SC “violated the basic precepts of understanding and
applying the Constitution.” –With Delon Porcalla
|
|
