ICJ views Sereno’s oust a deterioration of law

Along with other concerned institutions, ICJ cited that it also publicly condemned the SC for removing Sereno. (PNA photo)

The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) is “gravely concerned” over the proceedings of the Supreme Court (SC) that ruled the ousting of former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

The ICJ saw this move as a contribution to the “overall deterioration in the rule of law in the country.”

“Preserving the independence of the judiciary in the Philippines is crucial at a time when the government is credibly alleged to have been engaged in widespread and systematic human rights violations, amounting to crimes under international law,” Frederick Rawski, the ICJ Asia Pacific Director said in a statement on May 30, Wednesday.

“Given the perception of political interference and the potential impact of this case on the credibility of the judiciary as a whole, it is imperative that the Court swiftly and fairly consider the Chief Justice’s motion for reconsideration,” he added.

According to the ICJ, the High Court’s decision “opened the floodgates” to similar attacks against members of the Judiciary or even the Philippine Commission on Human Rights (CHR).

ICJ described the SC as a “sharply divided” court, and its decision just added to the perception that government institutions are unable or unwilling to protect the rule of law. Thus, they are then attacking those that are “protecting” it.

Along with other concerned institutions, ICJ cited that it also publicly condemned the SC for removing Sereno.

Furthermore, ICJ noted that it called on the High Court to ensure that any proceedings are conducted in observance of the highest standards of judicial ethics, “as reflected in the international standards such as the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Court.”

These international standards it mentioned specified that the judiciary, the individual judges must be able to conduct themselves without “improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect… for any reason.”

The ICJ released its statement in line with Sereno’s lawyers filing for a 203-page motion for reconsideration against the SC’s decision to oust her through a quo warranto.

“In accordance with letter and spirit of Section 2, Article XI of the Constitution, this Honorable Court had consistently held in a long line of jurisprudence, that impeachable officers, especially Members of the Supreme Court, could be removed only by impeachment,” she wrote, adding, “Now, an impeachable officer may also be ousted via quo warranto.”