SC will not participate on Congress’ JDF probe

buy modafinil online in the best USA pharmacy https://www.meditestdiagnostic.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/08/png/buy-modafinil.html no prescription with fast delivery drugstore

” width=”300″ height=”225″ /> Supreme Court of the Philippines. Photo by Mike Gonzales courtesy of Wiki Commons.

MANILA – Citing pending appeals on cases involving the Priority Development Fund (PDAF), Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno said that the Supreme Court (SC) will not be participating in the House of Representatives’ investigation on the alleged misuse of the Judiciary Development Fund (JDF).

Sereno also said in a three-page letter to Speaker Feliciano Belmonte Jr.

that attending in the probe may cause the independence of the judiciary to be jeopardized.

“In order to preserve judicial independence and the integrity of the ongoing deliberations on the two cases, may I request on behalf of the Supreme Court, that until the motions for reconsiderations are resolved, no member, official or employee of the judiciary be involved by the committee on justice in the proceedings on House Bills Nos. 4690 and 4738 regarding the Judiciary Development Fund,” Sereno said.

“The DAP cases are now the subject of motions for reconsideration, including one filed by the House of Representatives,” she stressed.

The chief justice, instead suggested the House of Representatives to consider the “absence of urgency” on the matter based on the Commission on Audit report and move the hearing at “a better time.”

“With your indulgence and those of your esteemed colleagues in the House of Representatives, officials of the Supreme Court shall be available to the committee on justice as soon as the resolution of the motions for reconsideration becomes final,” Sereno said.

“Since I assumed office, the COA has not disallowed any expense, and neither has it found any fraud or irregularity with respect to the management of the fund,” she added.

Sereno also indicated in the letter that she still has to consult with his colleagues on “how best the judiciary can meaningfully participate in the valid legislative concerns of the House of Representatives without sacrificing judicial independence and fiscal autonomy.”