MANILA - Following the impeachment of the late Chief Justice Renato Corona in 2012, then Associate Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno aspired to lead the country's judiciary.

Only two years after being designated to the Supreme Court, she applied for the top judicial position.

From 22 applicants, eight were shortlisted by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) that included Sereno and her colleague, Associate Justice Teresita de Castro.

While the most junior among the candidates, Sereno was appointed by former President Benigno Aquino III as chief magistrate. She became the first woman to hold the position and was expected to serve until she reaches the retirement age of 70 in 2030.

De Castro, three years ahead of Sereno in the high court, was bypassed.

Did it forever color the relationship of the two justices? Sereno said so. De Castro said she never dwelled on it.

• The grudge’: Sereno says De Castro won’t forgive her for accepting Chief Justice post

But in De Castro's 45-page concurring opinion on the Supreme Court's majority ruling to remove Sereno, the former made her sentiments clear.

She did not mince words.

Sereno, she said, has the "proclivity to lie, mislead, bend the rules, and exploit the exemptions, in disregard of constitutional, statutory, and regulatory parameters; ethical conduct; and collegial courtesy.

'FALSE ISSUANCES'

The two justices first came to a head when Sereno created the Judiciary Decentralized Office (JDO) in the 7th Judicial Region on November 2012 allegedly without the prior knowledge and approval of the en banc.

De Castro spoke about this when she testified against Sereno at impeachment proceedings against the then top magistrate at the House of Representatives.

• De Castro questions Sereno order creating JDO

De Castro accused the ousted chief magistrate of falsifying a court resolution to make it appear that the en banc ratified the operation of the JDO, under the pretext of reviving the Regional Court Administration Office (RCAO) in Central Visayas.

RCAO is a project aimed at decentralizing the Office of the Court Administrator, which exercises administrative supervision over the lower courts and assists the high courts in coming up with and implementing administrative policies over lower courts.

The two again locked horns over Sereno's move to expand the coverage of a temporary restraining order (TRO) that prevented the Commission on Elections (Comelec) from proclaiming party-list winners in the May 2013 elections.

• Senior justice calls boss Sereno's attention anew

"Respondent radically changed my recommendation on the scope of the TRO," she said in her concurring opinion.

De Castro earlier rejected Sereno's plea for her to inhibit in the high court proceedings on the plea to oust her. The latter had cited her alleged bias.

• Sereno calls for De Castro's mandatory inhibition from quo warranto case
• 'Baseless': Why 6 justices rejected Sereno's inhibition plea

As the justice in charge of the party-list's case, De Castro said she had recommended that a TRO be issued to prevent the Comelec from implementing its resolution which disqualified the Coalition of Senior Citizens in the Philippines.

Another instance when Sereno allegedly exhibited "lack of candor and honesty in dealing with her colleagues," the associate justice said, was during the application of Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza to the Supreme Court in 2014.

• Jardeleza accuses Sereno of treason over West PH Sea issue

De Castro agreed to the concurring opinion of Associate Justice Arturo Brion on the case that "Sereno manipulated the JBC (Judicial and Bar Council) processes to exclude Jardeleza as a nominee."

Sereno opposed Jardeleza's appointment after he supposedly omitted Itu Aba, the largest feature in the disputed Spratlys in the South China Sea, in the memorandum filed by the Philippine government before the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) at the Hague in the state's arbitration case against China.

Jardeleza, who as Solicitor General at the time served as the Philippine agent in the case, was eventually appointed to the high court.

The Philippines, meanwhile, won the arbitration case in July 2016, with the landmark ruling invalidating China's nine-dash line claim to nearly all of the South China Sea.

'SPURIOUS CLAIMS'

De Castro also took exception to Sereno's application to the Supreme Court, which she said was characterized by "a pattern of lies and deception."

Sereno allegedly made spurious claims when she indicated in her personal data sheet (PDS) that she was a deputy commissioner in the Commission on Human Rights (CHR).

"Her explanation is absurd as functions cannot be attributed to a non-existent position in the CHR," De Castro said.

The impeached chief justice, she said, also claimed to be a lecturer at Murdoch University and the University of Western Australia (UWA).

De Castro said Sereno served as lecturer at the Esteban School, now the Australian International School, in Taguig City.

The Esteban School partnered with UWA and offered UWA's MBA program in the Philippines.

"Respondent's falsehoods in her sworn PDS when she applied to vacant posts in the Supreme Court foretold the deception she perpetrated regarding her SALNs (statements of assets, liabilities and net worth) to ensure her inclusion in the shortlist of nominees for the vacant post of Supreme Court Chief Justice," she added.

• Supreme Court ousts Chief Justice Sereno

In an unprecedented move Friday, the Supreme Court voting 8-6, moved to oust Sereno by granting the quo warranto plea filed by Solicitor General Jose Calida.

The petition argued that Sereno was "unlawfully holding" office due to her alleged failure to submit her required SALNs when she applied for the position.

In the ruling, the court said it was right to give due course to Calida's petition, saying impeachment was not the only means to remove an impeachable officer.

It said a quo warranto plea was a valid remedy to ensure that "only qualified individuals" hold public office.

• SC: Quo warranto remedy ensures only 'qualified' hold public office