Quo warranto vs Leonen? House of Representatives to insist on jurisdiction over accused officials: legislator

MANILA – The House of Representatives will insist on its jurisdiction over cases against indicted officials, a lawmaker said Thursday after a complaint was filed against Associate Supreme Court Justice Marvic Leonen.

Leonen is charged with “guilty violation of the Constitution and treason against the public trust” by attorneys Lorenzo Gadon and Edwin Cordevilla.

The House Justice Committee may address the impeachment demand next year as congressional sessions are scheduled to end on Wednesday, Vice President Rufus Rodriguez said.

“I believe that the Supreme Court will not make the same mistake of having a quo warranto against the accused officials because according to the Constitution. Only the House of Representatives will accuse him and only the Senate will listen and dismiss,” he told Factual Affairs of the ANC.

“We assure that we will insist on the commission that we will have exclusive jurisdiction and this particular case will not happen as happened to the former president of the Supreme Court (María Lourdes) Sereno … It is only Congress that can remove the officials under trial. “

Sereno’s appointment was overturned by the high court in 2018 as he faced an impeachment lawsuit before the House of Representatives.

It is the duty of the committee of the House of Representatives to listen and determine if the complaint has merit and if it has sufficient form, Rodríguez said.

“We do not determine it for reasons. We determine it in the corners of the complaint itself because it is everyone’s right to file a complaint as long as it is endorsed by a congressman,” he said.

“There are hints that this is political, this is something that the motives are not very clear, nothing commendable. That is something beyond the committee.”

The complaint was presented by the 2nd deputy from Ilocos Norte, Angelo Barba, cousin of Senator Imee Marcos and former Senator Bongbong Marcos, whose electoral protest against Vice President Leni Robredo remains pending in the Presidential Electoral Tribunal. The Supreme Court acts as PET.

The PET recently rejected Bongbong Marcos’ appeal seeking Leonen’s inhibition of the electoral protest.

As in the case of Sereno, the complaint against Leonen alleged that he committed a betrayal of the public trust when he failed to file his Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) Statements for 15 years during his tenure at the University of the Philippines.

The complaint also alleged that the SC magistrate guilty of a violation of the Constitution by arbitrarily delaying the resolution of the cases pending before him due to his “incompetence and inefficiency” as president of the Electoral Court of the Chamber.

Incompetence is not grounds for impeachment, Rodríguez said.

“The competition is not but could be. The Supreme Court has already decided what is the meaning of the betrayal of public trust, broadens the scope of the grounds for impeachment,” he said.

“As defined by the Supreme Court, it is not criminal, but due to its impact on public service, it rises to a level of constitutional violation of public trust.”