G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018

'''G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018 is a decision 2018 landmark ruling or leading case''' by the Supreme Court.

Related: Re: Show cause order in the decision dated May 11, 2018 in G.R. No. 237428 (Republic of the Philippines, represented by Solicitor General Jose C. Calida v. Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno)

Case Details

 * Republic of the Philippines Vs. Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno
 * G.R. No. 237428. May 11, 2018
 * Justice Noel Tijam
 * Dissenting Opinion
 * J. Carpio, J. Leonen, J. Caguioa
 * Concurring and Dissenting
 * J. Velasco, Jr., J. Del Castillo
 * Concurring Opinion
 * J. Leonardo-De Castro, J. Bersamin
 * Separate Concurring Opinion
 * J. Peralta
 * Separate Opinion
 * J. Perlas-Bernabe, J. Jardeleza, J. Martires
 * Justice Noel Tijam (Motion for Reconsideration)
 * Concurring Opinion
 * J. Leonardo-De Castro
 * Separate Concurring Opinion
 * J. Peralta
 * Separate Opinion
 * J. Jardeleza
 * http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/may2018/237428.pdf
 * Quo Warranto Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno
 * http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/pdf/web/viewer.html?file=/jurisprudence/2018/june2018/237428.pdf
 * Concurring Opinion
 * J. Leonardo-De Castro
 * Separate Concurring Opinion
 * J. Peralta
 * Separate Opinion
 * J. Jardeleza

Issue

 * 1) Whether the Court can assume jurisdiction and give due course to the instant petition for quo warranto against respondent who is an impeachable officer and against whom an impeachment complaint has already been filed with the House of Representatives;
 * 2) Whether the petition is outrightly dismissible on the ground of prescription;
 * 3) Whether respondent is eligible for the position of Chief Justice:
 * 4) * a. Whether the determination of candidate's eligibility for nomination is the sole and exclusive function of the JBC and whether such determination. partakes of the character of political question outside the Court's supervisory and review powers;
 * 5) * b. Whether respondent failed to file her SALNs as mandated by the Constitution and required by the law and its implementing rules and regulations; and if so, whether the failure to file SALNs voids the nomination and appointment of respondent as Chief Justice;
 * 6) * c. Whether respondent failed to comply with the submission of SALNs as required by the JBC; and if so, whether the failure to submit SALNs to the JBC voids the nomination and appointment of respondent as Chief Justice;
 * 7) * d. In case of finding that respondent is ineligible to hold the position of Chief Justice, whether the subsequent nomination by the JBC and the appointment by the President cured such ineligibility.


 * 1) Whether respondent is de jure or de facto officer.

Re: Show cause order in the decision dated May 11, 2018 in G.R. No. 237428 (Republic of the Philippines, represented by Solicitor General Jose C. Calida v. Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno)

 * May respondent be held administratively liable for he ractions and public statements as regards the quo warranto case against her during its pendency?

Info
John Adams, then President of the United States, said, "society's demands for moral authority and character increase as the importance of the position increases."

In this case, it was found that respondent is ineligible to hold the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court position for lack of integrity on account of her failure to file substantial number of SALNs and also, her failure to submit the required SALNs to the JBC during her application for the position. Again, one of the Constitutional duties of public officer is to submit declaration under oath of his or her assets, liabilities, and net worth upon assumption of office and as often thereafter as may be required by law. When the Constitution and the law exact obedience, public officers must comply and not offer excuses. When public officer is unable or unwilling to comply, he or she must not assume office in the first place, or if already holding one, he or she must vacate that public office because it is the correct and honorable thing to do. public officer who ignores, trivializes or disrespects Constitutional and legal provisions, as well as the canons of ethical standards, forfeits his or her right to hold and continue in that office.

Decision
WHEREFORE, the Petition for Quo Warranto is GRANTED. Respondent Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno is found DISQUALIFIED from and is hereby adjudged GUILTY of UNLAWFULLY HOLDING and EXERCISING the OFFICE OF THE CHIEF JUSTICE. Accordingly, Respondent Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno is OUSTED and EXCLUDED therefrom.

The position of the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is declared vacant and the Judicial and Bar Council is directed to commence the application  and nomination process.

This Decision is immediately executory without need of further action from the Court.

Respondent Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno is ordered to SHOW CAUSE within ten (10) days from receipt hereof why she should not be sanctioned for violating the Code of Professional Responsibility and the  Code of Judicial Conduct for transgressing the sub judice rule and for casting aspersions and ill motives to the Members of the Supreme Court.

SO ORDERED.

Sereno, C. J., no part. (Ousted) Reyes, Jr., and Gesmundo, JJ., concur. Carpio, J., See Dissenting Opinion. Velasco, Jr., J., Pls. see Concurring and Dissenting Opinion. Leonardo-De Castro, J., Please see my Concurring Opinion. Peralta, J., Please see separate concurring opinion. Bersamin, J., Please see Concurring Opinion. Del Castillo, J., dissent. Pls. see separate opinion. Perlas-Bernabe, J., certify that J. Bernabe submitted her Separate Opinion voting to DISMISS the petition. Leonen, J., dissent. See separate opinion. Jardeleza, J., certify that J. Jardeleza left his vote concurring with the ponencia of J. Tijam. Caguioa, J., dissent See separate opinion. Martires, J., concur in the results with separate opinion.

Trivia

 * Quo Warranto ousted the Chief Justice for the first time.
 * Maria Lourdes Sereno wants to inhibit the "Bias5"