Chief Justice hopefuls undergo JBC interviews

By Benjamin B. Pulta

04/20/2010

As it had earlier been announced, the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) yesterday conducted public interviews on the four nominees for the position of chief justice in order to better determine who among them is fit to be included in a shortlist of nominees to the post that it would submit to the President.

It was the first-ever public interview conducted by the JBC on incumbent Supreme Court (SC) justices who accepted nominations for the chief magistrate.

SC Justice Arturo Brion was the first to be interviewed. The other nominees to be interviewed were SC Associate Justices Renato Corona and Teresita Leonardo De Castro and Sandiganbayan Justice Edilberto Sandoval.

In his interview, Brion said the next chief justice should be open to the possibility of a constitutional reform. “The chief Justice should be aware of constitutional reforms...The Constitution should be its baby,” Brion told the members of the JBC.

He moreover said the possibility of Charter change is among the long term reforms that the judiciary should face.

In reaction, SC Appointment’s Watch co-convenor Vincent Lazatin said he found Brion’s opinions quite “interesting,” particularly in his having talked about Charter change and the conduct of a constitutional convention without anyone raising those subjects.

“It’s interesting (to find out) where he got those ideas. No one asked him about it. (But) He probably knows something that we don’t,” Lazatin said, apparently alluding to what plans Malacañang may have that it had divulged to Brion.

Brion also spoke of the widely held perception of the SC being involved in political partisanship, which the next chief justice will have to erase. “The next chief justice cannot do it alone by himself. The entire SC and even the judiciary should exert effort to erase such perception. I believe that the Court can do this through its decisions,” he said.

Brion as well stressed his stand on the judiciary’s independence. “The judiciary must be free from interference, but there should be continuous dialogs and communication among other branches of government,” he said.

The nominee was also asked about the issue of the appointing authority of the President, to which he answered that the Constitution very clearly speaks on the appointing authority of the Chief Executive, that there is no ban on his/her making “midnight appointments.”

He also talked about the need for the next chief justice to have moral ascendancy and defended himself against the complaints lodged against him before the JBC, opposing his nomination.

Brion said two of the complainants actually did not actually exist.

Brion assured that despite him being a former member of the Cabinet as he used to head the Department of Labor and Employment, he considers President Arroyo as “no longer his boss.” “She is no longer my boss. I now have a different master, the Constitution,” the SC magistrate said.

He also asserted that the SC and the chief justice should not be in the news. “It (SC) should only speak through its decisions. He (chief justice) should not be in the media limelight,” he said.

Earlier, the JBC joined other parties in asking the high court to reverse its March 17 decision, allowing Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice.

The JBC had filed a comment before the SC, saying that the consolidated petitions should be dismissed as these are patently premature.

While the JBC is moving for the reversal of the March 17 ruling, it said it will still abide by the final decision of high tribunal, but in accord with its own constitutional mandate and in line with its implementing rules and regulations.

The consolidated petitions involved the controversy of whether a sitting President has the power to appoint the next chief justice despite an existing ban on so-called midnight appointments.

Last March 17, the SC resolved the consolidated petitions and ruled that a sitting President has the power to appoint the successor of Chief Justice Reynato Puno, who will retire on May 17.

The high court earlier asked the JBC and the Office of the Solicitor General to file a comment on the several motions for reconsiderations and interventions seeking the reversal of the SC’s March 17 ruling, allowing Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice.

In a six-page comment, the JBC through its Secretary, Atty. Ma. Luisa Villarama, reiterated its stand that at the time of the filing of the consolidated petitions and administrative matter at bar, it was yet to decide whether to submit the shortlist of candidates to the position of chief justice to Arroyo.

“The JBC then intended to hear experts in Constitutional Law on the issue of whether the incumbent President has the power to appoint the new chief justice in view, among others, of the seemingly conflicting provisions of Section 15, Article 7 and Section 9, Article 8 of the Constitution and the election ban on appointments,” the JBC said in its comment.

“Since the council has yet to decide on the issue that time, it is submitted that the present consolidated petitions and administrative matter are patently premature and should have been dismissed,” it asserted.

Back to top

For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph
The Daily Tribune © 2006