Supreme Court clips Congress' role in JBC panel


Posted at Jul 18 2012 12:17 PM | Updated as of Jul 18 2012 08:17 PM

MANILA, Philippines (UPDATED) - Congress will be represented by just one vote instead of two in the selection of candidates for chief justice by the Judicial and Bar Council, the Supreme Court (SC) ruled Tuesday.

The decision was not immediately made public.

An source said that the voting was 7-2 as of Tuesday. This may still change until Thursday’s promulgation.

The same source said 5 of the 6 chief justice hopefuls inhibited. This means one of them voted in the petition filed by former Solicitor General Frank Chavez.

The two who dissented are Associate Justices Roberto Abad and Mariano del Castillo.

In his petition, Chavez said the Senate and the House of Representatives should vote as one body in the JBC.

Under the current setup, the Senate and the House vote separately in deliberations on qualifications of candidates for judicial posts.

In the ruling penned by Associate Justice Jose Mendoza, the justices agreed with the petitioner’s argument that there should only be “a representative of the Congress” in the JBC as provided in Article VIII Section 8 (1) of the Constitution.

This means Congress – although bicameral – should only be entitled to one of seven votes in the JBC and not two as has been the case since 2001. The executive branch represents only one vote.

SC spokesperson Ma. Victoria Gleoresty Guerra said the promulgated decision would be released on Thursday along with a dissenting opinion.

In a press conference Tuesday, Guerra confirmed that six justices vying for the top judicial post – acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justices Presbitero Velasco Jr., Teresita Leonardo-de Castro, Arturo Brion, Roberto Abad and Ma. Lourdes Sereno – inhibited from the deliberations and abstained from voting.

Chiz, Tupas comments

Guerra said the high court took into consideration the separate comments filed by the JBC and by Sen. Francis Escudero and Iloilo Rep. Niel Tupas Jr.

Escudero and Tupas had argued in their comments filed through the Office of the Solicitor General last week that the phrase cited by Chavez in questioning their separate voting rights in the JBC “was a case of plain oversight” on the part of the framers of the Constitution.

“When section 8(1) article VIII of the Constitution speaks of ‘a representative from Congress,’ it should mean one representative each from both houses which comprise the entire Congress,” Escudero and Tupas said.

But the SC agreed with Chavez that the current practice of allowing separate votes for the two members of JBC from Congress violates the constitutional provision which provides for seven votes in the council.

Guerra explained that the high court deferred the release of the voting results and opted to release first the promulgated decision so as to avoid confusion should there be changes in the votes cast by justices.

This was unlike the high court’s usual practice of announcing the results of voting on big cases ahead of the release of copies of its rulings.

Asked if this procedure now constitutes the new rule, she replied: “It would depend on circumstances. But as I said, it would be more official if the hard copies are already available.”


This development came into focus a week after the high court took back its order stopping the implementation of government’s new scheme fixing the salaries of bus drivers and conductors, just a day after the order was issued.

The SC spokesperson explained that decisions of the court, including when to release rulings to the media, are made on a case-to-case basis.

Guerra has said that reversals in decisions of justices are not unusual in the high court. She revealed that justices would, in some cases, change their mind and issue different opinions.

When asked if the high court was being more careful in announcing its decisions following a recall of the status quo ante order on the new salary schemes for bus drivers and conductors, she only said: “I cannot speculate.”

JBC composition

The JBC, through its most senior member, retired SC justice Regino Hermosisima, earlier filed a separate comment deferring to the high court the issuance of a resolution on the issue of the council’s eight-member composition.

Justice Hermosisima, Sen. Escudero, Rep. Tupas, Milagros Fernan-Cayosa from the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, Jose Mejia from academe, and retired Court of Appeals Justice Aurora Lagman from the private sector will participate in the deliberations of JBC on the selection of candidates for chief justice.

Recently, the high court appointed Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta as its representative in the JBC following the nomination of Carpio for chief justice and his inhibition as chair of the JBC.

Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, ex-officio vice chair of JBC, also inhibited from the proceedings after accepting her nomination for the top SC post.  – with reports from Edu Punay, Philippine Star and Ira Pedrasa,