UMALI: SERENO WILL HAVE HER DAY IN COURT

Umali's defenses are full of flaws that need rebuttal, in the interest of fairness, for consideration of the "my people."

Flaw No. 1. The inherent "independent power" of the House of Representatives, one of the pillars that support a functional democracy, was compromised, if not totally abandoned, when the "carambolas" (balimbings) of Congress left the party under which they were elected by their constituents to transfer to the other party where they can find, and have indeed found, the greener pasture.

Flaw No. 2. The appearance of the justices in Umali's committee did not preserve the integrity of judicial processes nor did it protect the principle of checks and balances and separation of powers. On the contrary, their descent from their ivory tower to engage in the "political thicket" was the surrender of judicial independence. Justices are not supposed to "promote themselves" by pandering to the legislative or executive departments. The promotion of their worth is only thru the justness of their decisions and actions.

Flaw No. 3. Does the assessment of the Chief Justice or any magistrate for that matter includes humiliation of character? Does her refusal to appear before Umali's committee to precisely avoid such personal embarrassment to protect the integrity of the position a failure to earn the status of primus inter pares? If Sereno is impeachable and deserves removal as CJ, then why the dilly dallying in forwarding the case to the Senate for trial? Isn't it a legal maxim that justice delayed is justice denied? And why the intrusion of quo warranto, a removal remedy not provided for in the Constitution? Could not the questioning of the Constitution itself be better carried out in the impeachment trial proper in the venue where it could be fairly pursued?

Flaw No. 4. The claim of 25,000 thousand Supreme Court employees supportive of Sereno's ouster is not absolutely supported by fact as there are many who refused to be dragged in this embarrassing situation. Moreover, to maliciously infer that the 13 justices
who approved of Sereno's leave was a sign of their desire to have her ousted--although one or three harbour such intent-- is most unfair to other justices who, as Leonen indicated, merely wanted her ample time to prepare her defense.

This case has dragged long enough. In the interest of fairness and justice, the best Umali can do is submit this to the Senate for trial. Judicial independence and integrity cannot be further damaged without damaging the very essence of justice. Merci! (By: cogito728sum - DISQUS)