Labing-walong taon siya sa posisyun na yan.
Siyempre marami ang nag-aalala sa hindi magandang epekto ng sobrang tagal sa kapangyarihan ng isang opisyal. Na kahit anong galing ng isang tao, kapag masyadong matagal sa pusisyun, kung hindi naging abusado, ganun-na ganun na lang sa mahabang panahon.
Ngunit matalino si Sereno. Valedictorian at cum laude siya ng siya at nag-graduate sa University of the Philippines College of Law noong 1984. Pang-14 siya sa bar exams.
“My leadership is to be exercised to uphold the truth. It is to be exercised in favor of those who are weak, in order that justice in its true sense may be rendered.” -Sereno
http://verafiles.org/front/sereno-vision-courage-and-accountability/
Nakuberan ko siya nang abogado siya ng grupo na lumaban sa MOA- AD (Memorandum of Agreement on Ancestral Domain) na sana ay magbigay ng state within a state sa mga Muslim. Kamuntik lang maipasa ito ni Gloria Arroyo. Mabuti lang naagapan at idineklara ng Supreme Court na ilegal.
Ang galing ni Sereno doon.
Kauna-unahang appointee ni Aquino si Sereno. Maayos naman ang kanyang mga desisyun. Medyo masyado lang kampi kay Aquino. Siya lang yata ang kumampi sa pamilyang Cojuangco sa isyu ng Hacienda Luisita. Kahit natalo ang mga Cojuangco sa kaso ng pagpapanatili ng control sa lupain, pinabigyan naman niya ang mga Cojuangco sa kabayaran na pabor sa kanila.
Tutal matalino naman si Sereno, siguro naman gagamitin niya ang talino na iyan para itaguyod ang independensya ng hudikatura. Sa demokrasyang sistema natin ang tatlong sangay ng pamahalaan – executive, legislative at judiciary – ay dapat magbantayan para maiwasan ang abuso ng isang sangay.
Sabi naman niya: “I would like to assure our countrymen I will keep my oath of office faithfully to the end of my term. We will deliver to the people our priorities and schedules in time.”
Ang kabutihan naman ng mahabang termino ay may panahon siya magtaguyod ng programa, lalo pa ng reporma. Siguro naman gagawin ni Sereno yan.
May iba akong ‘manok’. Hindi naman nakapasok sa walong nirekomenda ng Judicial and Bar Council na pagpipilian ni Aquino. Hindi bale, baka naman makapasok ulit sa listahan na ipapadala sa Pangulo sa papalit kay Sereno bilang associate justice.
May nagustuhan din ako doon sa walong pinagpilian ng Pangulo. Hindi rin nga nakuha. Ngunit okay lang kasi hindi naman nakuha ang iba ng medyo nakakabahala. Ang dalawa kasing sinasabi nila noong nakalipas na araw “frontrunners” ay masyado raw tinutulak ng mga negosyante. Medyo nakakabahala yun.
Si Sereno hindi siya nadikit sa kung sinong negosyante o grupong pulitikal. Okay na yan.
Dapat lang bantayan ng taumbayan. Ang tama, purihin. Ang masama, punahin.
Walang masama sa mahaba (ask Erap na mahaba ang pasensya).
JBL Reyes was also 52 when appointed. Hindi nga lang CJ.
Chief Justice Rehnquist served as CJ for 19 years, until his death.
Chief Justice Roberts will serve until he retires or dies; at the life expectancy of Americans, he will serve until he turns 78, or 28 years as CJ.
Basta magaling at malinis, okay na yan. The three qualify. Si Sereno, she looks qualified, but time will be the best test.
Yung tatlo, JBL, Rehnquist, Roberts, subok na, nang ma-appoint, dahil galing sa CA. Malinis naman, at maayos ang mga pasya. Si Sereno, galing sa labas yan, at baguhan pa sa Kataas-Taasang Hukuman. So let time judge the jurist.
As a Chief Justice, wala namang problema kay Chief Sereno. Sa administrative aspect ng Supreme Court, maayos ang patakbo ni Chief sa staff nya. Sa pagiging independent, baka nga dito magkaproblemam, the other way around. Nakapa aloof ni Chief Sereno nung Associate Justice pati mga staff nya, hindi accessible noon.
Ngayong natupad na ang hangad ng Pangulo, panalangin ko naman ay kumuha ng career jurist sa susunod.
Kalahati ng SC ay outsider. Nandiyan si
Sereno – Academe, bago naupo as justice
Abad – Academe
Carpio – corporate, bago naupo. No CA or RTC service
Brion – alalay ni Goyang before the CA. CA justices, ideally, should come from the RTC, as a “career reward”.
De Castro – DOJ; outsider din
Jose Perez – SC administrator (they don’t decide cases). Yan ang “insider” in a negative way.
Presbitero Velasco – outsider before the CA
The people who are career jurists are:
Peralta – fiscal, RTC, Sandigan
Mendoza – RTC, CA
Villarama – RTC, CA
Bienvenido Reyes – RTC, CA
Perlas – MTC, RTC, CA
Career din yung plagiarist, Mariano Del Castillo. Gayon din yung Bersamin, na maraming di magandang pasya (read Winnie Monsod’s columns).
As I’ve mentioned in an earlier thread during the Corona impeachment, the CJ has only one vote. So, even if he would always vote in favor of the one who appointed him. It’s still only one vote. How the CJ can influence the vote of other SC justices (by hook or by crook) is another thing.
Kung pumalpak tayo sa former lady president, sana manalo naman tayo sa lady CJ.
re #4
Mike, I totally agree with you!
so in corona`s impeachment trial, they use the argument that all or most of corona`s decision FAVORED GMA, SO NGAYON, SI sereno voted in favor of pnoy to prevent gma from leaving, voted in favor of hacienda, so ano ito- i guess as corona said- the appointment speaks for itself
How does Carpio feel now that he was “bypassed” twice?
Let’s hope Sereno is not a Corona or like any of the old timers. Let’s also hope she does make us proud.
“SO NGAYON, SI sereno voted in favor of pnoy to prevent gma from leaving, voted in favor of hacienda, so ano ito- i guess as corona said- the appointment speaks for itself”—acibig
Sereno voted for the Hacienda distribution in favor of the farmers.
Butata na naman si “Corona”, hehehe.
I was reading the Vera Files link on Sereno’s background. But what caught my attention amid all the litany of praise was the line:
Since the Fraport/PIATCO case was of personal interest to me and was discussed lengthily in this blog, I googled a bit about what has happened since we won in the International Centre for Settelement of Investment Disputes(ICSID) arbitration in 2007 and why the freaking airport is still partially operational.
I was pointed to the ICSID site and I found out that there is a very recent (Aug12, 2012!) updating of the Center’s treatment of annulment cases of previous awards. There was a strong policy revisit and reminded all involved basically that the Annulment can be availed of only under the instances under Article 52 of the Convention, upon the initiation of present SolGen Cadiz and Treasury Sec Purisima. The Philippines is apparently protesting a decision of the ICSID.
What I found out was that the 2007 award has been “annulled in full” in December 2010. WTF?
Of course, this does not concern Sereno anymore since after she had won the case in 2007, she left the team in 2008. This happened in 2010, when we had 3 SolGens taking the case one after the other. Mostly under the time of Devanadera, who has since been barred from public office for graft, Gloria’s election operator Agra, and present SolGen Cadiz. It was unthinkable that we lost in that appeal especially if only technical reasons were appealable since the country’s legal team included ex-Justice Florentino Feliciano, himself a veteran of the ICSID.
The annulment decision alone is about 200+ pages, all in English I can understand but not seem to comprehend (LOL). I hope some interested party, perhaps saxandviolins, baycas, or Atty. Harry Roque, could help us understand.
Maybe Vera Files can help enlighten us.
The Aug. 12, 2012 ICSID document can be found here:
https://icsid.worldbank.org/ICSID/FrontServlet?requestType=ICSIDNewsLettersRH&actionVal=ShowDocument&DocId=DCEVENTS11
And the Annulment Decision here:
http://italaw.com/sites/default/files/case-documents/ita0341.pdf
Tongue, I’ll bring this to the attention of my colleagues and maybe, Harry Roque. Thanks.
There is nothing wrong with being in position for a long time…Hazel McCallion was the Mayor of Mississauga during the Big CP rail derailment in the late 70s and prove her Tag Hurricane Hazel by handling the crisis with applaumb and still the mayor of the city in her 90s and never been seriously challenge…the First Woman CJ of Canada, Beverly McLaughlin was nominated by PM Chretien in 2000 for 18 years to retirement at age 75 and 6 years to go and she is nearing her very important Campaign to make the access to Justice and Legal system one of the Fundamental Rights of all citizens, the same as Education and Health Care…In one of her Major Speech before the Country Top Politicians and Officers of the Country Legal profession, she called on them to work for these Goals and if to Legislate them if necessary then go ahead…because in her words, the access to Legal system is only for the very poor and the very rich, and the middle income class has to take a second Mortgage to go for litigation or forego them and it should not be Happening…
And many had predicted that the country will go belly up with the universal health care and tax funded basic education…the CJ said they were proven wrong and having access to legal system system universally available will again prove its critiques wrong…6 more years and she will succeed…and to CJ Maria Lourdes Sereno, Yours is just Starting…Best Wishes and remember, there are many to follow and even exceed…the choice is yours…
What I found out was that the 2007 award has been “annulled in full” in December 2010. WTF? -tongue #10.
Paki explain nga mga mabubunying lawyers kung bakit nagkagay-un. Mawawalan ako ng brain cells kung itutuloy basahin link ni tongue. 🙂
Si Sereno hindi siya nadikit sa kung sinong negosyante o grupong pulitikal. Okay na yan. – Ellen
Makakahinga tayo ng ayos sa impormasyong ito, at least sa simula, let’s hope na hanggang matapos ang 18 years nya bilang SC chief justice.
Agree ako sa sinabi ni Ellen na purihin ang tama, punahin ang mali, walang kinikilingan base sa kanya-kayang reasons at common sense.
# 10 and 11
Browse lang ito, so subject to more extensive reading.
There is, either a typo in the annulment decision, or nagka-onsehan. At the international level? Either possibility is outrageous.
The proceeding is for annulment of the “award” (decision) by the arbitral tribunal, dated August 16, 2007. The award, actually, is not monetary, the Arbitral Tribunal merely stated that it had no jurisdiction to entertain Fraport’s claims against the Philippines, and dismissed Fraport’s claims.
The award is on page 14 of the pdf, which states:
Then there is a long discussion about each party’s claims, Fraport stating that it was error on the part of the Arbitral Tribunal to say that it had no jurisdiction, and the Philippines arguing that the AT had.
Then the committee analysis started on page 97. On page 98, it held that:
The committee, then, discusses its findings, and demolishes all the bases for Germany’s submission that the AT did have jurisdiction, and should not have dismissed Germany’s claim.
The committee analysis ends on page 109 (tem 208), with the following:
Sorry. Spoken too soon nga.
On page 91, item 247, the committee states that the award is annulled in its entirety.
The annulment is based on the failure of the Arbitral Tribunal to take into consideration the dismissal by the Philippine prosecutor of the complaint about the anti-dummy law ( ADL) – that Fraport was not liable under the ADL (page 80).
The issue I posted above is another basis for Fraport’s claim. They were sustained, however, on the denial of the opportunity to be heard.
Since the award was only a dismissal, then that means mag-uulitan sa baba (Arbitral Tribunal).
Mea culpa.
What I could not understand is that this Ad Hoc Committee was created upon an application of annulment filed by Fraport. Fraport hinged on the dissenting opinion of one of the three arbitrators, he says violation of the ADL did not mean the “investment” was not covered by the Treaty (BIT), since it did not mention the text of the treaty, I assume it says that any dispute arising from the Airport contract shall be decided by the ICSID, or maybe somewhere along that line.
In conclusion, what we have been fighting in case filed in 2003, decided in 2007 and annulled in 2010, was simply for a dismissal for lack of jurisdiction, am I right?
Now, the frigging airport that was contracted to be delivered by 2002 is still incomplete and cannot be fully utilized but already old. Dios mio!
Now, we are actually being told by ICSID that the previous dismissal has been reversed, meaning we can now begin hearing the complaint, if it takes another nine years, well bahala na. Yun ba yun?
We also have the other arbitration case in Singapore which we won, plus several other local cases. What I remember is that the government filed expropriation against PIATCO despite the contract being declared void ab initio and last I heard, Gloria’s gov’t negotiated payment with the Chengs in PIATCO and leaving out Fraport in the split. Now PIATCO would not give Fraport’s share.
Ang saya-saya no?
If this Terminal 3 is being held hostage by these legal battles, and we desperately need it to decongest Terminal I which is undergoing repairs, what should effin gov’t do now?
Expropriation? Sino ba ang may-ari ng airport?
So the Philippine government (bought) expropriated its own property?
Sarap naman ng buhay ng mga Cheng.
BOT siguro kaya naexpropriate. I’m not sure.
Kahit BOT, the property owner does not change.
The Build-Operate-Transfer scheme started with NAPOCOR plants, which, in an earlier post, you said you participated in by filing a bid. The scheme allows contractors to build and operate what was, by law, only operable by the government; the operation is subject to their transfer of said plants to government, for free, after a certain number of years. But the land on which the plants are/were built is owned by the government (NAPOCOR).
The transfer is for free, because the operator is allowed to operate and profit on it for the specified years.
Were there no BOT scheme, the government (NAPOCOR), in this case, would have had to pay for the plants, because not to do so, would be unjust enrichment. Had the government refused to pay, they could have been taken to court, for payment.
The civil code says:
So the government already owns the improvements to NAIA. It, however, is liable to pay, because it contracted for those improvements.
So there is no need to expropriate.
Why did Goyang do it? So she could pay her stooges. It also gives her the control of the pricing (so she can overprice to her heart’s content).
If regular payment were made, then you have to go through the COA. But if expropriation were instituted, your government lawyers can take a dive, in the determination of just compensation for the land, and not object to a higher valuation. Then they can say, well that was the determination of the court, so we paid.
Ang galing di ba?
So it’s back to your previous question – so the Philippines expropriated its own property?
Is that legal? If not, why did and how can the courts allow it?
**********************
And yes we bidded on the Sual Power plant BOT project. The Fidel Ramos – Guido Delgado tandem upon assumption of office in 1992 transferred the site to Bauang, La Union. We were caught offguard and could not immediately proceed, our Canadian partners would not put up the $30M performance bond unless we again completed the related environmental, logistics, economics studies, etc. Time caught up with us Delgado canceled the contract. We later learned the Sual plant was also pursued using Ramos’ emergency powers and awarded to Alsthom. May manok pala silang alaga kaya ginawan nila ng paraan para matigok yung kontrata namin.
Our experience with BOT didn’t even get to the “build” part. Lol.
So there was a contract. And I presume the contract specified Pangasinan.
The transfer to Bauang, La Union is a material alteration of the contract. I would have sued, in court, for time. And if not granted, for damages. You could have even gotten a TRO, pang-inis lang. They would have bought you out, to speed up the assumption of their own favored contractor.
Of course, patak muna ang metro ng “magiting na abogado”. But I would have asked for a contingency fee. No money down, duguin mo, then you get a percentage of the award. They do that in personal injury (accident) cases here.
Did you find out who was the Pinoy broker?
So far so good sa first day ni Chief Sereno. Wala nang interview sa Chief Justice, ibabalik ang “golden days of dignified silence” Kabaligtaran sana kung si De Lima ang naappoint.
Wishlist na gawin ni Chief Sereno sa darating na araw:
1. Bawasan na ng poder si Midas Marquez na puro papogi lang bilang court administrator.
2. Bawasan ang gastos sa mga luho ng Supreme Court at Court of Appeals para naman ang kinikita ng Supreme Court ay bumagsak sa maliliit na empleyado sa judiciary.
3. Tutukan ang mga indi magaganda ang mga reputation sa supreme court at court of appeals.
3.
It was a lost cause since we didn’t even protest the transfer. We knew our Canadian partner lost interest and committed their resources instead to building a power plant in Walden North, wherever that is, in Canada. We were left with a contract, no partner, no bond, no supplier my boss just gave up.
Sorry, the contract was for Bauang they transferred it to Sual. We later learned both projects were accomplished. The emergency powers of Ramos then was so broad, even bidding rules can be changed midstream.