CALIDA DEMOLISHES SERENO COMMENT!

Here are excerpts from the CRYSTAL-CLEAR reply of Solicitor General Jose Calida to the comment of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno on his quo warranto petition to oust her (http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/news/nation/648063/calida-accuses-sereno-of-lying-in-comment-to-quo-warrant-rap/story/):

According to Calida, Sereno made a misrepresentation before the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) when she claimed in a letter that she could not fully comply with the Statements of Assets, Liabilities, and Net Worth (SALN) requirement because her records of more than 15 years, when she was still a University of the Philippines (UP) professor, were "infeasible to retrieve." But  certifications from UP and the Office of the Ombudsman showed that Sereno did not file her SALNs from 1986 to 1989, 1992, 1999 to 2001, and 2003 to 2006. Calida said Sereno had been legally obligated to tell the JBC that she had failed to file her SALNs.

Calida cited a testimony before a House Committee on Justice hearing by then-JBC chair Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta, Calida, who said Sereno's supposed letter to the JBC "was never submitted for consideration" during the council's deliberations. "Without having been deliberated upon by the JBC, the letter cannot be considered anything more than a mere scrap of paper.”

Calida said Sereno’s SALN as of December 31, 1998 was filed in 2003, and that of 2009 on June 2012. The 2009 SALN purportedly indicates she was a Supreme Court Associate Justice -- she was appointed in 2010. Calida also said Sereno's SALN from 2006, the year she resigned from UP, "bears no stamp receipt" from the university and was only signed in 2010, "the same day that she submitted it to the JBC and was not notarized."

Calida also said the text of the Constitution allows the ouster of an impeachable official through other modes than impeachment," and that the Constitution "does not include ineligibility to public position as a ground for impeachment. No one can be convicted for ineligibility." On Sereno's claim that the one-year period for filing his quo warranto petition  had lapsed, Calida said the Rules of Court provides the prescriptive period only for a petitioner who claims a right to a public office, and not to "the State which has an interest to ensure that only a qualified individual occupies the highest position in the Judiciary."

On Sereno's claim that 14 out of her 20 co-applicants for to the position of chief justice failed to comply with the SALN requirement, Calida said:  "Whether the other candidates complied with the submission of SALNs before the JBC is absolutely of no relevance to this case. The fact remains that these other candidates were not appointed to the position of Chief Justice, Respondent was."

I DID NOT ADD ANYTHING to these excerpts, ladies and gentlemen. Calida’s reply is more than clear enough to be understood by, and enlighten, everyone. 30