How JBC’s 5 votes can change the game

Purple S. Romero

This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.

A majority vote is enough to suspend the rules of the Judicial and Bar Council

'UNFAIR.' Tupas said the JBC may suspend its rules if the filing of a case against a contender is deemed 'unfair.' Photo by Matthew Balicudiong

MANILA, Philippines – Five votes.

For the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), 5 votes used to mean a candidate may be included in the shortlist for a certain position in the judiciary. Now 5 votes could also spell the suspension of a rule that disqualifies candidates with pending cases from the race.

JBC rules state that candidates with pending administrative or criminal cases should be disqualifed from aspiring for a judiciary post. But Iloilo Rep Niel Tupas Jr said that if an action or decision against a candidate for the post of chief justice is “unfair,”  the JBC, by a simple majority vote, can suspend its rules disqualifying contenders with pending cases.

The JBC is a consitutional body that vets nominees for judiciary posts and submits a shortlist to the President who makes the final choice. It is scheduled to meet on Friday, August 10, to finalize its shortlist of chief justice nominees for President Benigno Aquino III.

Tupas, one of the 8 members of the JBC, previously said that the council may take up his suggested amendment in 2011. Tupas had asked the JBC in 2011 to give the council full discretion in deciding if contenders with pending cases could still be included in the shortlist or not.

Tupas told Rappler on Thursday, August 9 that if it decides to amend its own rules, the JBC is required to inform the public about it via the mass media.

It will take only 5 votes from the council to suspend the rules.

Aside from Tupas, the other members of the JBC include La Salle law professor Jose Mejia, retired Court of Appeals Justice Aurora Lagman, Undersecretary Michael Frederick Musngi, retired Supreme Court Justice Regino Hermosisima, Integrated Bar of the Philippines offical Milagros Fernan-Cayosa and Sen Francis Escudero. The body is chaired by SC Justice Diosdado Peralta.

Not just for De Lima?

Should it happen, the JBC’s suspension of rules would pave the way for the likely inclusion of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, the reported choice of President Aquino, in the shortlist.

But Tupas and Mejia said the suspension will also benefit other contenders with pending cases. These include Acting chief justice Antonio Carpio (Lauro Vizconde belatedly filed a disbarment complaint against him on August 6), Presidential Commission on Good Government chairman Andres Bautista, Securities and Exchange Commissioner Teresita Herbosa and Solicitor General Francis Jardeleza.

“Suspending a rule will not be done just to favor a certain candidate,” Mejia said.

Under Rule 4, Section 5 of the JBC rules, the following are considered disqualifed from “appointment to any judicial post or as Ombudsman or Deputy Ombudsman:”

  • those with pending criminal or regular administrative cases
  • pending criminal cases in foreign courts or tribunal
  • those who have been convicted in any criminal case; or in an administrative case, where the penalty imposed is at least a fine of more than P10,000, unless he has been granted judicial clemency

Other members of the council find it unfair to nominees if frivolous cases are filed against them, Tupas said. Mejia added that it is also unfair to nominees if cases filed against them move at a snail’s pace.

De Lima said Thursday that the cases against her smacked of unfairness. 

“Feeling ko naiipit ako (I feel like I’m under siege),” she said before a budget hearing at the House of Representatives on August 9. 

De Lima faces 3 disbarment complaints. The IBP consolidated two complaints into one since they both cited as basis De Lima’s defiance of a Supreme Court temporary restraining order on the travel ban against former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her husband, lawyer Jose Miguel in November 2011.

The other case stemmed from a stinging statement made by de Lima against dismissed chief justice Renato Corona. De Lima called Corona a “tyrant who holds himself above justice and accountability” on national television.

De Lima said the cases filed against her are “nonsense” and that the SC did not act on them swiftly. The SC referred them to the Integrated Bar of the Philippines on July 3; the IBP ruled that they have merit and have ripened into regular administrative cases on July 30 and affirmed this ruling on August 6.

De Lima said she asked the JBC to weigh the “circumstances of the disbarment complaints.” – Rappler.com


More in #SCWatch:


Add a comment

Sort by

There are no comments yet. Add your comment to start the conversation.

Summarize this article with AI

How does this make you feel?

Loading
Download the Rappler App!