Group seeks to block new CJ appointment
MANILA, Philippines - A lawyers' group on Monday filed before the Supreme Court a petition to stop the Judicial and Bar Council to submit its list of nominees for Chief Justice to President Arroyo.
The National Union of Peoples' Lawyers said it filed the motion for opposition-in-Intervention to oppose moves by President -Arroyo to appoint a new Chief Justice before she steps down from office.
In its petition, the NUPL said Mrs. Arroyo cannot appoint anyone for the position of Chief Justice since Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno has yet to retire. Puno will vacates his position upon his retirement on May 17, 2010.
The NUPL said that once the position of Chief Justice becomes vacant, the President is still prohibited to appoint a new one since the vacancy in the Chief Justice position will fall within the 60-day prohibited period to appoint officials before the presidential elections.
The group said there are already rules in place should such a vacancy occur, and the most senior Justice on the Bench shall become Chief Justice in an acting capacity, until the new president appoints a new Chief Justice.
"In [her] desire to appoint a new Chief Justice, President Arroyo will be transgressing several laws and the Constitution and will also be breaking a long tradition already in place in our judicial system, and will also be encroaching upon the powers and the independence of the Judiciary," the group said.
Malacañang earlier asked the Supreme Court to compel the JBC to submit to President Arroyo its shortlist of nominees for the top post in the High Court.
A 34-page comment was filed by Solicitor General Alberto Agra which backed the petitions earlier filed by lawyers Arturo De Castro and Estelito Mendoza as well as the Philippine Constitution Association (Philconsa). The petitions sought the Court’s resolution of the issue of whether or not the JBC should submit its shortlist of nominees to President Arroyo for the Chief Justice post.
“The nature of respondent JBC’s function is executive. The present Constitution has not conferred legislative nor judicial powers on it. Accordingly, it is not vested with power to resolve issues. It has no discretion to withhold the list from the President. Nor does it have jurisdiction to determine whether the incumbent President can appoint the next Chief Justice in light of the peculiar circumstances of this case. Such jurisdiction lies in this Honorable Court,” Agra said.
The OSG said that the Court can issue a writ of mandamus to compel the 8-man JBC to perform its duty to submit its list of nominees to Mrs. Arroyo.
The OSG maintained that the position of Chief Justice is the most important appointment vested by the Constitution to the President. It said a prolonged vacancy particularly during a critical period such as an election period should be avoided.
“It is quite expected that there will be a deluge of cases involving sensitive political issues before this Honorable Court. National interest compels the President to make such appointment for it is particularly during this crucial period when national leaders are seeking fresh mandates from the people that the Supreme Court, more than at any other time, represents stability. Hence, a full court is ideal to ensure not only due deliberation on and careful consideration of issues but also expeditious disposition of cases,” it explained.
The OSG, in its comment tot the SC, added that the submission of the shortlist is necessary to give the President ample time to scrutinize the nominees.
Agra also argued that the election ban on midnight appointments under Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution does not cover the chief justice post based on the deliberations of the framers of the 1987 Constitution.
The comment prepared by the OSG noted that if the Chief Justice post will not be filled out during the time of Mrs. Arroyo, a violation of Section 4, Article VII of the Constitution would occur. The section requires a 90-day period within which an SC justice must be appointed.
Agra explained that the appointment ban lasts from 109 to 115 days in regular elections.