Who is richest Supreme Court justice, according to SALN 2012 submissions?

MANILA - The Supreme Court has allowed the release of copies of the Statement of Assets, Liabilities, and Net (SALN) worth of all the justices of the SC even to law students.

Acting on the letter of Denzel Edward V. Cariaga, representative of Arellano Law Class of 2017, the SC granted his request "for the 2012 SALN of all the justices of the [court], subject to the payment of the required fees[.]"

The SC reminded Cariaga "that (i) he must faithfully comply with his undertaking and declaration in the request and (ii) any violation thereof will subject him to liability imposed under Section 11, Republic Act No. 6713, in addition to any criminal, civil or administrative liability[.]"

Aside from the SALN of all the justices, Cariaga also asked the SC to furnish him a copy of the Terminal SALN of former Chief Justice Renato C. Corona.

Cariaga explained he made the request to comply with the academic requirements in Constitutional Law I.

While Cariaga's first request was granted, the SC told him the Terminal SALN of the impeached Chief Justice is not available, as he did not submit one. By a 20-3 vote, Corona was convicted by the Senate sitting as an impeachment court on May 29, 2012 of not making an honest declaration of his assets in his SALN.

New CJ has P18-M net worth

The SALN of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. Aranal Sereno for the year 2012 shows she has a net worth of P18,143,104.01.

Sereno's SALN put her 2011 net worth at P18.029 million, slightly higher compared to the P17.9 million declared in her 2010 SALN.

The latest SALN of Sereno--up to Dec. 31, 2012--shows she has total assets of P19,155,024.89 and total liabilities of P1,011,920.89.

She has four cars, a Toyota Altis 2005 Model, Toyota Corolla 1997 Model, Mitsubishi Lancer 1993 model and Toyota Innova E 2013 model, which is now under installment payments.

Her residential properties amounted to a total of P8,973,500: composed of four residential lots in Filinvest East, Cavite and Davao. A memorial lot in Cavite, purchased in 1997, is worth P60,000 only.

Sereno is married to Mario Jose Sereno and living at 31 Hunt st. Filinvest Homes East, Antipolo City, Rizal.

Richest, poorest justices

Associate Justice Mariano C. Del Castillo's declared the highest net worth for 2012 of P109,743,118.28.

This represented an increase by some P840,000 from P108,904,519.37 in 2011.

He had P110,127,634.66 in total assets and P384,516.38 in total liabilities.

The second richest justice is Senior Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio with a 2012 net worth of P83,885,614.57.

Carpio registered an increase of about P4 million from his SALN of P79,895,025.57 in 2011.

The third richest justice is Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes, with P76,542,167.31 in net worth in 2012.

He had P75,146,199 in 2011.

Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe is on fourth, with a net worth of P73,827,435 in 2012, or an increase of over P5 million from her P67,101,327 net worth in 2011.

The poorest justice is Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, the most junior member of the SC. Leonen had a net worth of P1,674,623.22 for 2012.

He had P2,333,679.22 in total assets and P659,056 in liabilities.

His SALN showed he had no real properties and one car, a Ford Escape.

The net worth of other Associate Justices: Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. with P8,679,740.49; Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro with P8,941,000; Arturo D. Brion with P11,908,742; Diosdado M. Peralta with P29,382,037.60; Lucas P. Bersamin with P18,811,447.87, Roberto A. Abad with P43.4 million; Martin S. Villarama, Jr. with P21,911,495.36; Jose C. Mendoza with P29,982,165.66; and Jose P. Perez with P11.76 million.

The SALN of justices was previously not disclosed by the SC until the impeachment trial of Corona.

source: interaksyon.com

Unseated Rep. Lucy Torres-Gomez can still run, says Brillantes

MANILA, Philippines – Rep. Lucy Torres-Gomez can still run for the fourth congressional seat of Leyte even if she was unseated by the Supreme Court on a ruling that her substitution as a candidate in place of her husband, Richard Gomez, in the 2010 elections was invalid, Comelec said Wednesday.

Commission on Elections Chairman Sixto Brillantes Jr., explained that Gomez is not officially unseated (and disqualified to run) until the decision is final and executory, unlike the case of unseated Imus Mayor Emmanuel Maliksi, which is immediate and executory.

"She is not disqualified, the disqualification was the substitution. The one disqualified there was her husband, and she merely subbed for him.”

Gomez was disqualified on the basis of residence, not technically disqualification but more because of the cancellation of the CoC (Certificate of Candidacy) (of the husband), Brillantes said.

Voting 7-4-4 last Tuesday, the Supreme Court ruled that her substitution as a candidate in place of her husband in the 2010 elections was invalid.

But since there was a motion for reconsideration from the congresswoman’s camp, “you cannot implement it,” Brillantes explained.

Grounds for disqualification

Brillantes said grounds for disqualification are listed in Section 12 and 68 of the Omnibus Election Code (OEC) and Section 40 of the Local Government Code. “These are grounds for disqualification and in the case of Lucy, [it’s the residence issue.] It is not a ground for disqualification under Section 68 of the Omnibus Election Code.”

He, however, said cases of disqualification may still be filed against any candidate even after the election, but before the actual proclamation of winning bets.

"Until after the election, when you commit fraud during Election Day, you will be disqualified and prevented for being proclaimed. Those are our rules, that you can file a disqualification case (even) before the proclamation,” Brillantes explained.

Brillantes said the Commission is drafting another set of rules on the disqualification process in order to make it easier for the protestant and the respondent, and to save time and money. 

"We would like to change the entire process of electoral process and revision of ballots. We will come out with it before the elections,” Brillantes said, adding that he is starting to read decisions from the Supreme Court regarding disqualification cases.

source: interaksyon.com

Supreme Court stops Cybercrime Law indefinitely

A day before the temporary restraining order (TRO) on the implementation of the Cybercrime Prevention Law lapses, the Supreme Court on Tuesday issued an indefinite extension on the TRO following clamor from petitioners and the general public.

The 120-day TRO was extended “until further orders from the court,” Supreme Court spokesperson Gleo Guerra said in text message.

The TRO is the last mechanism holding off the implementation of the controversial law, which has been scored by critics and civil society groups as an assault on Filipinos’ freedom of speech.

The high tribunal finished hearing the oral arguments of petitioners and the Solicitor General on the law last week, after which both camps were giv

source : interaksyon.com

SC releases audio of arguments on Cybercrime Law

MANILA, Philippines - For the first time in its 112-year history, the Supreme Court (SC) has released to the public a recording of its oral argument.

The SC public information office announced the audio recording of Tuesday’s oral argument on the constitutionality of Republic Act 10175 or Cybercrime Prevention Act can be downloaded from the high court’s website, www.sc.judiciary.gov.ph.

“You can now listen to or download the mp3 of the entire oral argument on the Cybercrime Act at the microsite for the Cybercrime Act orals at the SC website,” the SC PIO said in a text message to reporters.

Oral arguments of the high tribunal have been open to the public but recording of the hearings is prohibited under SC rules.

Even the media are barred from recording the proceedings in the high court. Reporters are not allowed to use audio or video recorders while covering oral arguments.

Proceedings of the SC in its session hall are strictly closed door. Not even the clerk of court is allowed inside the chamber when the justices are deliberating on cases during their full-court sessions.



 Results of the deliberations are only relayed by the chief justice or acting chair of the SC to the clerk of court after the proceedings.

This is why court observers viewed the move to make public recording of the oral argument as a positive step toward transparency in the high court.

Meanwhile, petitioners against RA 10175 yesterday lauded the SC justices for their deep understanding of issues surrounding the questioned law.

Lawyer Jose Jesus Disini Jr., one of the petitioners who argued for the unconstitutionality of some provisions in the cybercrime law before the high tribunal, believes the justices took time to understand how the Internet works to be able to understand the contentions cited in the petitions.

“Their questions were very relevant. They did their homework,” he said.

The 68-year-old Associate Justice Roberto Abad, who is tasked to write the court’s decision on the case, admitted during the public hearing that he has a Facebook account. The youngest member of the high court, Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, has a Twitter account.

Also during the hearing, justices talked about the 840,842 followers on Twitter of actor Derek Ramsey and the popular Twitter user “Professional Heckler.”

The collection of private data by websites Google and Amazon were also discussed during the debate.

Also cited in the hearing was Christopher Lao, the lawyer who received enormous criticisms online after berating a traffic officer he had taken to task for not being informed of flooding in a street.

In the early part of the debate, an exchange between Justice Leonen and former colleague at the UP College of Law, professor Harry Roque Jr. on the issue of cybersex triggered laughter among the observers.

“Can there be sexual activity without favor?” Leonen asked Roque, who laughed as he replied: “I take it as a rhetorical question, your honor.”

source: philstar.com

Supreme Court issues TRO on Anti-Cybercrime Act

MANILA, Philippines- The Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously voted for the issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping the enforcement of the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act. All 14 justices were present.

A series of protest actions have been staged in front of the Supreme Court premises on Padre Faura Street in Manila, including one today while the justices were in an en banc session.

The protesting groups, which are primarily against a provision in the law that criminalizes libel in cyberspace and grants the Justice department powers to block–without court order–access to data and potentially take down sites on a mere prima facie finding of violations of RA 10175, cheered when they heard the news, but remained adamant that the law be repealed.

Republic Act 10175, dubbed by critics as “e-Martial,” was signed into law by President Benigno Aquino III on September 12, the month of the 40th anniversary of the September 21, 1972 imposition by former President Ferdinand Marcos of Martial Law.

As many as 15 petitions to stop the enforcement of the law have been filed with the Supreme Court. Besides the petitions and the journalist-led rallies, a group of “hacktivists” calling themselves Anonymous Philippines also defaced a number of government sites, in protest of the new law. The government appealed to hackers to spare such sites, which include vital information needed by the public. The hackers, however, disowned the defacement of certain sites like Project NOAH that provides vital weather data.

Bayan Muna partylist Rep. Teodoro Casino Jr., who on Monday filed the 15th petition, said there was no question in the law’s goal of addressing cybrecrime, which has now become rampant.

Casino, however, said the law’s libel provisions that give the government surveillance power over the activities of a person using the Internet infringe on the netizen’s privacy and freedom of expression.

The TRO was issued as the high tribunal deliberated en banc on 15 petitions from various groups and personalities from the media, lawyers’ and free-speech advocates’ sectors, all seeking a halt to implementation of the Cybercrime Prevention Act.

Earlier petitions were filed by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP) assisted by FLAG lawyers, the Philippine Bar Association, the Ateneo Human Rights Center and a bloggers’ group, among others.

Earlier on Monday, two other petitions were filed, one by Casiño’s fellow Bayan Muna solon Neri Javier Colmenares and lawyer Edsel Tupaz, and another by the National Press Club.

The most contested provisions across all petitions are in Sections 4,5,6,7, 12 and 19, or the so-called “take-down” provision that most constitutionalists deem the most dangerous to civil rights. It grants the Justice department the power to block access to data, and potentially shut down web sites, on a mere prima facie finding of a violation of RA 10175. This, even without a court order.

Constitutional rights infringed

The PBA petition said among the constitutional rights infringed by the law are those against double jeopardy and bill of attainder, besides the provision that automatically makes the penalties on e-libel and other violations one degree higher, compared to libel in the traditional media.

Casiño, who has just filed his candidacy for senator, told reporters that their petition to nullify the law is similar to the previous pleas against the law’s “e-libel” provisions, Section 19 or the “take down clause,” and the authority given to the Department of Justice to apprehend suspectede cyber criminals even without warrants of arrest.

According to the lawmaker, even people who text and call using cellular phones with Information Communications Technology or ICT device could be accused of e-libel.

Dubbed by critics as “e-Martial Law,” the act was signed by President Benigno Aquino III last September 12 days before the commemoration of the 40th year of the September 21, 1972 imposition of Martial Law by President Ferdinand Marcos.

In its 61-page petition, PiFA and Casiño appealed to the high court to require the government to cease and desist from implementing the law while the petition is pending.

The act violates the freedom of speech, expression and of the press, unreasonable searches and seizures, right to privacy, due process, equal protection of the law, among others, according to the petitioners.

They added that the law “is constitutionally infirm on its face for being vague and overbroad,” a criticism shared by most other petitioners.

source: interaksyon.com

Journalists join fray with e-petition against Cybercrime Law

In a case of the medium being the message, more than 200 journalists and media groups on Wednesday submitted an electronic petition (e-petition) to the Supreme Court, asking it to nullify the controversial Cybercrime Prevention Act.

The e-petition, the first ever of its kind, was filled by members of the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines, the Philippine Press Institute and the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility.

"While many individuals and groups have already submitted petitions asking the High Court to nullify parts of it or junk it altogether, we believe it is necessary for the SC to hear as many voices as possible, including that of the media community, which uses the Internet as a news platform, relies heavily on electronic communication and whose members are very active in the social media," said NUJP secretary general Rowena Paraan in a letter.

Though the petitioners went through the usual process of submitting hard copies of the petitions to the Supreme Court, they also circulated the e-petition online and invited interested signatories to participate by clicking on a link and filling out an online form.

"This petition is filed, partly as an electronic document, because some of the petitioners are based outside of Metro Manila, with others based outside the Philippines," the petitioners said.

The petitioners included 20 media organizations and 250 journalists and media practitioners.

Signatories to the petition included journalists from GMA News, GMA News Online, ABS-CBN/ABS-CBNNews.com, Rappler.com, Mindanews, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Interaksyon.com, SunStar, Daily Tribune, Malaya/Business Insight, VERA Files, Far Eastern Broadcasting Corporation, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Center for Community Journalism and Development, Peace and Conflict Journalism Network Philippines, Philippine Center for Photojournalism, among others.

Named respondents in the petition were the executive secretary and the respective secretaries of the Departments of Justice, Interior and Local Government, and Budget and Management; as well as the respective heads of the Philippine National Police and the National Bureau of Investigation.

The Cybercrime Prevention Act came into effect on Wednesday.

The petition

In their 27-page petition, the journalists wanted the High Court to declare as unconstitutional, if not the law in its entirety, at least the following sections of the Cybercrime act:

- Sec. 4(c)(4) (Libel); Sec. 5(a) (Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime); Sec. 6 (inclusion of all felonies and crimes within coverage of the law), which the petitioners said violates the freedom of expression.

- Sec. 7 (Liability under Other Laws), which they said violates a person's constitutional guarantee of protection against double jeopardy.

- Sec. 12 (Real-Time Collection of Traffic Data), which violates a person's right to privacy of communication and correspondence.

- Secs. 14 (Disclosure of Computer Data) and 15 (Search, Seizure and Examination of Computer Data), 19 (Restricting or Blocking Access to Computer Data), and 20 (Non-Compliance), which is allegedly in violation of the separation of powers "as judicial powers are unduly delegated to the secretary of Justice, PNP, and the NBI."

- Sec. 24 (Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center) and 26(a)(Powers and Functions), which give the Cybercrime Investigation and Coordinating Center the power to formulate a national cybersecurity plan. 

The petitioner argued this power should properly fall within the authority of Congress and not an administrative agency.

They also said the specific provisions "unlawfully delegate" to police officers the authority to issue orders that should only be "within the scope and sphere of judicial powers and where non-compliance is penalized as a crime."

The petitioners wanted the court not only to prohibit the respondents from implementing the law, but also to prohibit them from formulating the accompanying Implementing Rules and Regulations.

The petitioners said giving the Department of Justice and Department of Interior and Local Government the authority to promulgate the implementing rules and regulation (IRR) would be an "unlwaful delegation of legislative powers and result in arbitrariness."

"The petitioners stand to suffer grave and irreparable injury with no speedy or adequate remedy at law," they said.

They also said the implementation should be stopped because public funds to be appropriated under the law could be wasted in case the law is eventually annulled. — DVM, GMA News

source: gmanetwork.com

'Black days' continue as SC fails to act on TRO pleas vs 'e-Martial Law'

MANILA, Philippines - Black days will continue among thousands of Filipino netizens as several groups protesting against the Cybercrime Prevention Act failed on Tuesday to have the Supreme Court stop the law's implementation, which will begin on Wednesday, October 3.

The high court did not issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) against Republic Act 10175, dubbed by critics as "e-Martial," which President Benigno Aquino signed last September 12, the month of the 40th anniversary of the September 21, 1972 imposition by former President Ferdinand Marcos of Martial Law.

The seven petitions against R.A. 10175 "are up for further study" by the high court,  according to Maria Victoria Gleoresty Sp. Guerra, acting chief of the Supreme Court's Public Information Office.

Several protest-actions led by the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan), National Union of Journalists in the Philippines, the Philippine Internet Freedom Alliance, and social media groups dubbed "Black Tuesday" were staged in front of the Supreme Court premises on Padre Faura Street in Manila while the justices were in an en banc session. 

The groups were primarily against a provision in the law that criminalizes libel in cyberspace.

Bayan Muna partylist Rep. Teodoro Casino Jr. said there was no question in the law's goal of addressing cybrecrime, which has now become rampant.

Casino, however, said the law's libel provisions that give the governmenmt surveillance power over the activities of a person using the Internet infringe on the netizen's privacy and freedom of expression. 

Bayan secretary general Renato Reyes Jr. on Tuesday said that his group "was disppointed" with the high court's inaction on  the petitions.

"The fight is not over though since no outright denial has been made," Reyes said in a statement.  However, Reyes said that without a TRO from the high court, "the new law takes effect tomorrow."

"We call for continued vigilance and the aggressive exercise of our freedoms. Keep posting, keep blogging, stay active on the issueon and offline," he added. 

Black protest, amendments

The "black protest" has continued in cyberspace. Facebook users changed their profiles into black. Social media users also posted on Facebook a status update containing a black horizontal bar followed by a text that read: “[status update blocked.] (by RA . 10175).”


The blacked-out status updates have already gone viral and are being posted today by practically every Facebook user who is against the law.

As protests were staged in front of the Supreme Court, several lawmakers on Tuesday began the initiative to amend the cybercrime law in Congress by proposing to take out someits provisions.

Filing House Bill 6613, Casino and Rep. Raymond Palatino of Kabataan partylist sought to repeal thelaw's controversial sections, which many critics say will impinged on thebasic rights of Internet users.

“Nais naming tanggalan ng pangil ang batas na tumatama sa basic rightto freedom of expression ng mga mamamayan,” Casino said at a newsconference.

The bill proposed to repeal the following:

Section 4(c)(4) of Chapter II (Punishable Acts)Libel. The unlawful or prohibited acts of libel as defined in Article355 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, committed through acomputer system or any other similar means which may be devised in thefuture.

Section 5 of Chapter IIOther Offenses. The following acts shall also constitute an offense:(a) Aiding or Abetting in the Commission of Cybercrime. – Any personwho willfully abets or aids in the commission of any of the offensesenumerated in this Act shall be held liable.(b) Attempt in the Commission of Cybercrime. — Any person whowillfully attempts to commit any of the offenses enumerated in thisAct shall be held liable.

Section 6 of Chapter IIAll crimes defined and penalized by the Revised Penal Code, asamended, and special laws, if committed by, through and with the useof information and communications technologies shall be covered by therelevant provisions of this Act: Provided, That the penalty to beimposed shall be one (1) degree higher than that provided for by theRevised Penal Code, as amended, and special laws, as the case may be.

Section 7 of Chapter IILiability under Other Laws.  A prosecution under this Act shall bewithout prejudice to any liability for violation of any provision ofthe Revised Penal Code, as amended, or special laws.

Chapter IV - Covering Enforcement and Implementation.

source: interaksyon.com

Aquino names Philippines' 1st female chief justice

MANILA (AP) -- The Philippine president appointed the country's first female Supreme Court chief justice Friday and praised her ability to lead the court after her predecessor was removed for constitutional violations.

President Benigno Aquino III was confident Maria Lourdes Sereno will lead "in undertaking much-needed reforms" in the judiciary and "restore our people's confidence in the judicial system," presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda said.

Sereno has been an associate justice on the 15-member tribunal since August 2010 and was formerly a law professor. Now 52, she will serve on the court until retirement at 70.

Former chief justice Renato Corona was impeached and convicted in May for not disclosing his $2.4 million bank accounts. Aquino had called Corona an obstacle in his anti-corruption campaign.

Sereno was one of the minority members of the court who voted in favor of the Aquino government's order to stop former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo from leaving the country allegedly to evade corruption charges.

Sereno was one of the eight nominees for chief justice submitted to Aquino by the Judicial and Bar Council. In an unprecedented move to show transparency in choosing the chief justice, the council conducted a televised interview of all 20 aspirants to the post and took questions from the public via Twitter and Facebook.

In a brief statement, Sereno assured her countrymen she would stand by her oath "faithfully to the end of my term."

"This is a serious job that calls for the support of the entire country for it to be successful and I understand the implications of this job," she said, adding she will announce her proposed judicial reforms soon.

Left-wing Rep. Rafael Mariano questioned her independence, saying she will be "politically indebted" to Aquino for her appointment. He challenged her to uphold a Supreme Court decision to break up the Aquino family's sugar estate and distribute the land to farmers.

Farmers' groups worry that her opinion of compensating the estate owners according to the 2006 fair-market value of the property rather than an earlier year would jack up the amortization payments of farmers who will get the land.

Roan Libarios, president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, said they welcomed her appointment and he believes she will be independent.

"She is good for the call of the times for transparency and reforms in the judiciary," he said.

source: asianjournal.com

Corona in "high spirits" as he leaves to testify for trial

Chief Justice Renato Corona remained positive before testifying in his impeachment trial Tuesday, his son said.

Francis Corona said his father was in "high spirits" hours before he is set to testify in the proceedings. Before heading for the Senate to testify at his impeachment trial, a calm Corona faced nearly 700 court employees who prayed and wished the magistrate well.

Corona, who is set to take the stand on Day 40 of his impeachment trial, arrived at around 10:10 am for the inter-faith rally and send off ceremony organized by Supreme Court employees. Corona didn't give any interviews and left shortly at around 11:15 am on board his black SUV. He is expected to drop by his office and leave for the Senate at around 1 p.m.

Security personnel at the SC estimated the number of the predominantly red-clad employees, who attended the send-off, between 600 and 700.

"They've been here since early morning and people keep trickling in," a security personnel told InterAksyon in Filipino.

During the send-off, Corona's wife, Cristina, and children, Francis and Carla, were given a standing ovation during the brief ceremony. Also in attendance were Corona's Ateneo law school fratmates from the Fraternal Order of Utopia.

Shortly after the ceremony, Corona waved goodbye to his supporters and boarded his car to the Senate.

source: interaksyon.com