Select Page

Bar Examination Questionnaire For Civil Regulation

More than professional competence, this Court is cognizant of the reality that the power of Our institution is decided by the arrogance reposed on Us by the public. As can be gleaned from Our recent decisions, this Court has not hesitated from disciplining its members whether they be judges, Justices or regular court staff. This case mustn’t therefore be treated merely with child gloves as a outcome of it includes the very best official of the judicial branch of the government. On the opposite, this is an opportune time for this Court to actual accountability by inspecting whether or not there was strict compliance with the legal and procedural requirements within the appointment of its Members. The comment-in-intervention is digital echo of the arguments raised in respondent’s remark that quo warranto is an improper remedy against impeachable officials who could additionally be eliminated only by impeachment and that the application of the PET guidelines are limited solely to the President and Vice-President’ who’re elective, and never appointive, officials. Movant-intervenors equally argue that the petition is already time-barred as the cause for motion arose upon respondent’s appointment as Chief Justice on August 24, 2022 or nearly six years in the past.

It is thus perturbing that sure officers of the separate branches of the Government and even men and women discovered in regulation had succumbed to the tempting affray that tends to divert the instant quo warranto action from its major function. Even worse, respondent and her spokepersons selected to litigate respondent’s case, aside from her Ad Cautelam submissions to the Court, before several media-covered engagements. Through her actuations, respondent appears to have forgotten that this may be a court motion for quo warranto, and as such, the concomitant rule on sub judice unnegotiably applies. Worst nonetheless, respondent who is a lawyer and who asserts right to the Chief Justice place and therefore must foremost pay attention to the rule, continues to conjure public clamor against the Court and its Members with regard to this pending case in Court. Well-settled is the rule that skills for public office should be possessed at the time of appointment and assumption of workplace and also during the officer’s whole tenure as a unbroken requirement.

Sadly We Are Unable To Offer You Access To Our Website Right Now

This interpretation is inherently a policy question that may solely be nullified on the ground of grave abuse of discretion, which may be coursed only via a petition for certiorari. To allow a direct resort to quo warranto would amount to bypassing the JBC, and in consequence, render weak the integrity of the Judiciary as an establishment. Indeed, it couldn’t have been meant that the OSG could merely are out there in at any time and ask the Supreme Court to re-assess the subjective skills of any Judiciary appointee when the same had already been determined by the physique particularly created therefor. Notably, since a petition for certiorari assailing the act of the JBC wouldn’t constitute an attack in opposition to a “judgment, order or decision” of a “tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial features,” it’s due to this fact obvious that the sixty -day filing interval beneath Section four, Rule sixty five of the Rules of Court would not apply.

dating advantage for black woman

The “power-sharing scheme” between the Judiciary and the Legislature was explicitly deleted beneath the present Constitution. The propositions superior by the majority threaten and undermine judicial independence and stability. [newline]The President, the Justices of the Supreme Court, and the Members of the Constitutional Commissions shall be faraway from workplace on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, different excessive crimes, or graft and corruption. When sitting for that function, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. The process does not allow removal for another crime or misdemeanor. It just isn’t left wholly to the discretion of the members of Congress. The proof must infer information which amount to the offenses talked about.

Barangay Naasug

Lecaroz concerned a criminal cost against a mayor earlier than the Sandiganbayan, whereas the remainder were disbarment cases filed towards impeachable officers principally for acts carried out during their tenure in public workplace. Whether the impeachable officer unlawfully held his office or whether or not his appointment was void was not an issue raised earlier than the Court. The precept laid down in mentioned cases is to the effect that during their incumbency, impeachable officers can’t be criminally prosecuted for an offense that carries with it the penalty of elimination, and if they are required to be members of the Philippine Bar to qualify for their positions, they cannot be charged with disbarment. The proscription does not prolong to actions assailing the public officer’s title or right to the workplace she or he occupies. The ruling therefore can not serve as authority to carry that a quo warranto motion can never be filed towards an impeachable officer. In issuing such pronouncement, the Court is presumed to have been conscious of its power to issue writs of quo warranto beneath Rule sixty six of the Rules of Court.

  • The case held that the necessities set by the Constitution are absolute, and that no one, not even the Legislature which possesses plenary powers, can add to the identical.

College of Law and for concealing her true revenue and evasion of taxes which have been the identical attacks on her eligibility and skills as enumerated within the Articles of Impeachment; and identity in the reduction sought as both the quo warranto and the impeachment sought her removing from the Office of the Chief Justice. There is nothing within the aforementioned textual content of the constitutional provision that means a penalty for a convicted impeached officer lesser than elimination from office and disqualification to hold public office. To be sure, none of these enumerated lighter penalties are mentioned in the identical article concerning accountability of public officers or anyplace else in the Constitution. The ponencia depends on two constitutional provisions to justify the Court’s assumption of jurisdiction over the current proceeding. First is the specific grant of authentic jurisdiction over quo warranto petitions to this Court underneath Section 5, Article VIII of the Constitution. Second is the absence of an specific provision within the Constitution restricting the removal from office of an impeachable officer solely to impeachment.

Open chat