The Supreme Court said yesterday that its members “have been very objective and impartial” in handling cases lodged before it, as it clarified the rules on the voluntary inhibition of judges or justices.
The statement comes at the heels of the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the SC on June 16 stopping the continuation of the construction of Torre de Manila.
A statement issued by Spokesman Theodore O. Te aimed to dispel doubts on the capability to rule objectively on the issue of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno, and other justices who did not vote on the issuance of the TRO.
There were insinuations that Sereno did not vote for the issuance of a TRO because her husband was formerly connected with the DMCI group of companies.
In his statement, Te said: “Mindful of the procedures for causing the voluntary inhibition of any judge or justice from any pending matter, but in the interest of dispelling any further speculation on her capability to rule objectively on a particular pending matter, the Chief Justice has authorized this statement pro hac vice (only for this instance):
“The Chief Justice’s husband, Mr. Mario Jose E. Sereno, was connected with Dacon Corporation, a Consunji-owned corporation, but resigned from that company almost 26 years ago, in July 1989.”
Te said that under the SC’s Internal Rules, particularly Rule 8, Section 3(c), “any mandatory inhibition arising from membership of a justice with a law firm that acted as counsel ceases within a period of ten years unless the justice personally handled the matter.”
“The supposed connection of the CJ’s spouse to a party in a pending case is not a ground for mandatory inhibition. Note also that the connection ceased 26 years ago,” he added.
MANILA BULLETIN
