SC justice won’t say if Sereno ‘intentionally, deliberately’ delayed survivorship benefits

Supreme Court Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta could not say if Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno intentionally delayed the release of survivorship benefits for spouses of deceased justices and judges when she supposedly created a special committee for it.

At the resumption of the House Committee on Justice hearing on Monday, Siquijor Representative Ramon Rocamora asked the justices if they have personal knowledge or any document that would show that the creation of the special committee was done to delay the granting of the benefits.

Peralta, in response, said it was not for them to determine the answer to Rocamora's question.

"Your Honor, sa tingin ko 'yan ang duty ng impeachment committee. By the testimony of the witnesses is for you to draw a conclusion from the testimony of the witnesses. Di kami pwedeng magsabi nun," he said.

Rocamora, however, told Peralta that he asked the question because no one from the witnesses has so far proven that fact.

But Peralta insisted that Rocamora was asking them whether or not there was culpable violation of the Constitution in Sereno's supposed act.

"Kasi ang tanong niyo po whether or not there is culpable violation of the Constitution. Kung ang tanong niyo po kung meron kaming personal knowledge, definitely wala," Peralta said.

"But ang question niyo is if that act, na may personal knowledge kami, is equivalent to culpable violation. May kadugtong 'yun," he added.

Rocamora stressed that he was only asking whether the justices had personal knowledge that would lead the lawmakers to say that Sereno's act was intentional and deliberate.

Even before Peralta could reply again, Quezon City Representative Vincent Crisologo raised a point of order, saying that Peralta had already answered the question.

House justice panel chair Reynaldo Umali agreed with Crisologo: "It has been asked and answered."

For one last time, Rocamora asked Peralta if he had no personal knowledge.

"Yes. The documents will show and based on the complaints, may mga complainants po kasi dito. Yung mga complainants po yung surviving spouses. So sa kanila they can say, that they have personal knowledge," Peralta replied.

For her part, lawyer Josa Deinla, one of the spokespersons of Sereno, said Peralta's admission that he has no personal knowledge on the matter weakens the chief justice's impeachment complaint.

In a statement, Deinla said Peralta's lack of personal knowledge only shows that the impeachment proceeding is nothing but a "fishing expedition" aimed at building up a "baseless and malicious" complaint against the chief justice.

“We believe that when all the sides have been heard and all the facts have been properly bared, these will serve to establish the fact that there simply is no basis for the malicious, perjurous and ridiculous allegations against the Chief Justice,” Deinla said.

The House justice committee is conducting a hearing to deliberate on the impeachment complaint lodged against Sereno. —KBK, GMA News