De Lima: SC, JBC, IBP conspired against me

MANILA, Philippines – It was a conspiracy of 3 sectors in the judiciary against one disqualified contender for the post of chief justice.

This was how Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, still smarting from her disqualification, described the decision that excluded her from the shortlist of chief nominees that was submitted to President Benigno Aquino III on Monday, August 13.

She said it was “obvious” that the Supreme Court, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) and the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) conspired to “pin me down.”

The JBC on August 13 submitted a shortlist of 8 nominees for chief justice to President Aquino but excluded his favored choice, De Lima, from it. The decision was a setback for the President who, according to Cabinet officials close to him, had no other choice for the post but De Lima.

De Lima herself could not be appeased. Talking to reporters Tuesday, August 14, she said: “Obvious naman the SC, the IBP, the JBC mukhang nagkasundo sila trying to pin me down and banding together as if nagkaroon sila ngayon ng objective na anybody but De  Lima. That’s my feeling,” she told reporters. (It’s obvious that the SC, the IBP and the JBC all agreed to pin me down as if they had one objective that it should be anybody but De Lima.)

De Lima said the SC acted late on the disbarment complaints against her because it only referred the cases to the IBP in July. (The cases were filed in December 2011).

Yet, she noted, the SC quickly dismissed a disbarment complaint filed against a senior justice who is also vying for the post of chief justice. De Lima was obviously referring to Acting Chief Justice Antonio Carpio, who garnered 7 of 8 votes from the JBC. In dismissing the case filed by Lauro Vizconde against Carpio, the SC reiterated its old verdict that SC justices can only be removed through impeachment, not disbarment.

“You can’t blame me if I feel this way. Ako lang tinarget nila (They targetted me.) Why?” she asked.

But De Lima said she will not question the decision of the JBC. “I just have to be strong and go on with my life,” she said.

Review rule

She also said that she will push for a “review” of the “lopsided” disqualification rule of the JBC, the body that screens and vets aspirants to the judiciary for the President.

De Lima is referring to Rule IV Section 5 of the JBC, which disqualifies contenders with pending criminal and regular administrative cases and those who have been penalized and fined P10,000 in the course of their careers as lawyers.

De Lima had appealed her case to the IBP and asked it to drop the case against her. But in a unanimous vote, the lawyers’ group ordered a full-blown probe on the 3 cases that had been consolidated into one. All the 3 disbarment complaints —  filed by Ricardo Rivera, Fernando Perito and Nephtali Aliposa in December 2011– were based on De Lima’s defiance of a Supreme Court that allowed former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband to travel abroad.

De Lima said that while she, as a member of the JBC, did not support the amendment of the rule when Iloilo Rep Niel Tupas Jr first proposed it in 2011, she believes it’s time to “revisit” it to have clearer parameters on when cases are considered regular or not.

‘Conspired’ against me 

De Lima as justice secretary is one of the 8 members of the JBC, but she had to inhibit from the selection process this time since she was a contender. 

Up until last Monday, August 13, when the JBC disqualified her, De Lima was considered the frontrunner in the race.

De Lima said though that the IBP did not determine if her cases had merit or not and just based its decision on the presumption that since the SC referred the cases to them for formal investigation, the cases had already become regular administrative cases. 

In 2011, Tupas wanted to amend the JBC rule on disqualifying contenders, saying the JBC should be given full discretion in deciding if the cases against the candidates are grave enough to merit disqualification.

De Lima did not support Tupas’s proposal then, saying it will “preempt the decision of the bodies tasked to handle the cases [in the future].”

De Lima, however, said there is reason to review the rule now because it favors sitting justices, who could not be harassed by disbarment cases because they can only be removed through impeachment.

“At that time [2011], we did not foresee it. We were not yet thinking of the lopsidedness of the rules when it comes to the Supreme Court position,” she said, adding the rule may be more applicable to positions in the lower court. 

What’s a regular case?

She clarified though she is not changing the position she held in 2011: She still believes that contenders with pending regular administrative and criminal cases should be disqualified. But she said the rule should be clear enough to define when does a case become a regular administrative matter.

“It’s so obvious. That rule is quite lopsided in favor of insiders in the Supreme Court,” De Lima said. “Kasi kung ganyan, sitting or incumbent Supreme Court justices can never be subjects of administrative cases because they are impeachable officials. In other words, they can never be disqualified on that ground.”

“I’m a victim of the lopsidedness of that rule.”

She added that the IBP should also move “expeditiously” to decide on the disbarment cases filed against her. “They’ve already succeeded in blocking my CJ bid, what do they want to do, disbar me?” – Rappler.com

More in #SCWatch:

• De Lima did not have the votes. Period.
• JBC: How they voted on CJ shortlist
• JBC disqualifies De Lima from CJ race
• How JBC’s 5 votes can change the game
• 22 official candidates for Chief Justice
• JBC to interview CJ candidates starting July 24
• 25 accept nominations for chief justice
• Questions for chief justice candidates
• JBC should review process of choosing CJ
• Besides JBC, Palace has judicial search committee
• CONVERSATIONS: How should the JBC choose the next chief justice? #SCWatch