Magnificent 7 to seek impeachment of 8 SC justices in Sereno ouster

FILE: If the eight Supreme Court (SC) justices who voted in favor of the quo warranto petition against former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno will not reverse their ruling, the opposition Magnificent Seven would file impeachment cases against them. (Photo by Supreme Court of the Philippines)

If the eight Supreme Court (SC) justices who voted in favor of the quo warranto petition against former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno will not reverse their ruling, the opposition Magnificent Seven would file impeachment cases against them.

“If they recant and reconsider then there’s no case. They have traced their footsteps backward in order to see the light,” Albay Representative Edcel Lagman, leader of the group, said in a press briefing on Tuesday, May 22.

“But if they insist and persist on their unwarranted and unconstitutional decision, then we’re going to file the impeachment complaints individually and separately against the errant justices,” he added.

The High Court, voting 8-6 in a special en banc session on May 11, granted the quo warranto petition filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida, which sought to remove Sereno from her post as the head of the judiciary.

The justices who voted in favor of the petition were Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Francis Jardeleza, Samuel Martires, Noel Tijam, Andres Reyes Jr., and Alexander Gesmundo.

“Justices of the Supreme Court cannot be allowed to be supreme even in their arbitrariness and malevolence. To let them escape scot-free is to condone injustice and oppression,” Lagman said.

“The only viable remedy and constitutional mode of holding justices accountable for their blunder is to remove them from office by impeachment,” he added.

Lagman, citing provisions of the Constitution, said that it is only by impeachment initiated by the House of Representatives and conviction by the Senate can an impeachable official be ousted from office.

“These clear provisions of the Constitution were ripped apart by the eight justices,” Lagman said.

The lawmaker explained that the magistrates were liable for culpable violation of the Constitution because they “arrogated the power and jurisdiction of the Congress to impeach the Chief Justice.”

“They repudiated the recommendation of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) for the appointment by the President of Chief Justice Sereno which is the sole prerogative of the JBC under Section 8(5) of Article VIII of the Constitution which expressly provides that the JBC ‘shall have the principal function of recommending appointees to the Judiciary’,” he said.

Lagman noted the justices were also guilty of betrayal of public trust when five of them refused to inhibit themselves from participating in the ruling of the quo warranto petition, given the fact that they have “publicly expressed their bias” against Sereno when they testified for her impeachment before the House Committee on Justice.

Lagman and his allies will file their complaint “most probably by second week or the end of the first week of June,” depending on whether the eight justices would reconsider their decision.

The six other lawmakers who formed the House Magnificent Seven opposition bloc are Tomasito Villarin (Akbayan Citizens’ Action party-list), Edgar Erice (Caloocan City, 2nd District), Teddy Baguilat Jr. (Ifugao), Gary Alejano (Magdalo party-list) and Emmanuel Billones (Capiz, 1st District), and Raul Daza (Samar).

The opposition lawmaker said the complaint that the group is going to file will definitely be sufficient in form and substance, thus the committee on justice “will be constrained to conduct the necessary deliberations and hearings.”

He also denied that this move will open floodgates of impeachment complaints from anyone who is against to any ruling of the SC.

“We rejected the decision of the SC when they allowed the burial of Marcos in the Libingan ng mga Bayani. We also rejected the SC decision when they sustained the declaration of martial law and its extension but we never said we were going to file an impeachment case against those whose decisions we did not favor,” Lagman explained.

“So it is not true that just because we do not favor the decision we can opt to impeach them in this case it’s very patent the decisions was unconstitutional,” he added.

Villarin earlier announced his plan to file impeachment complaints against the eight justices behind Sereno’s ouster. He expressed optimism that this move would be supported by his colleagues at the Lower Chamber.

“I believe that Congress, especially the House, would do its constitutional duty of protecting our Constitution, the Congress being the sole institution in which an impeachment complaint will be filed and heard,” Villarin said on May 17.