Prescriptive period to question Sereno appointment has lapsed, Lagman insists

ALBAY Representative Edcel Lagman reiterated Tuesday, March 6, that the one-year prescriptive period within which to question the validity of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno's appointment has already lapsed.

Lagman was reacting to the two petitions filed before the Supreme Court to question the validity of Sereno's 2012 appointment.

Lagman said the prescriptive period started from the time the Judicial anf Bar Council (JBC) started its deliberations on Sereno's appoimtment.

"From said time during the JBC deliberations or upon her appointment or assumption to office in August 2012, the one-year prescriptive period started to run," he said.

The petitions were filed by lawyer Oliver Lozano on March 1 and by the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) on March 5.

The Supreme Court en banc earlier Tuesday dismissed Lozano's petition, which sought to declare void the appointment of the Chief Justice.

The court en banc, however, ordered Sereno to comment within 10 days on the quo warranto petition filed by the OSG.

In its quo warranto petition, the OSG urged the High Court to declare as invalid Sereno's appointment over her failure to submit her Statement of Assets Liabilities and Networth to the JBC when she vied for the top post in the judiciary in 2012.

The OSG said the suit against Sereno is seasonably filed.

Section 11 Rule 66 of the Rules of Court provides that "a petition for quo warranto against a public officer or employee shall be filed within one year after the cause of his ouster or the right of the petitioner to hold such office or position arose."

The OSG argued that the said limitation does not apply to the present case for the reason that the petitioner only came to know the questionable appointment of the Chief Justice during the series of impeachment hearings at the House of Representatives against Sereno.

Lagman objected to this. He slammed Solicitor General Jose Calida for using as excuse the OSG's belated discovery of the alleged violation of the Chief Justice.

"It is a joke for Solicitor General Jose Calida to claim that it was only recently during the impeachment proceedings that the government learned that Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno failed to submit all of her prior years’ SALNs when she was a professor in the UP College of Law," Lagman said.

He added: "This is a convenient ruse to avoid the inevitable that the filing of the subject quo warranto petition against Sereno has long expired under the Rules of Court." (SunStar Philippines)

Trending

No stories found.

Just in

No stories found.

Branded Content

No stories found.
SunStar Publishing Inc.
www.sunstar.com.ph