Headstart: Senate can't review SC decision on quo warranto vs Sereno: ex-justice

A former Supreme Court magistrate believes the Senate cannot review the SC's decision if the high tribunal grants a quo warranto petition nullifying the appointment of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

[parasabayankongmahal]

Ang talas ng sagot ng abogado na ito. Salute to this man.

[truthundefeated]

Thanks to you ATTORNEy!! Thumbs up!!! Well explained!!!

[rudysantiago]

Impeachment is for valid appointment only pnoy appoint ment to sereno is not valid ask joma why

[teresabalcruz]

Kaya nga sinabing supreme court ksi sila n nga ang pinaka mataas sa lahat at wala ng iba pa. Haizzt bakit b pinag gigitgitan p yang senate impeachment court e special power lng naman yan n ibinigay sa senate if there is an impeachable offense commited by any government official. Meron naman talga si sereno n mga offences n ginawa n impeachable kaso nga before those offenses e nakitaan n sya ng paglabag hindi p man sya chief justice. At yun ay nung nag aaply plang sya n maging chief justice. Hindi sya nagpasa ng tamang saln sa jbc. Dun plang lumabag n sya sa panuntunan ng batas. Hindi sya qualified at the first place kya dun pumasok ang quo waranto. Wag ksing baluktutin ang katotohanan at

[reyreyes]

ousting the CJ by SC is different from impeachment by the Senate; it is moot to impeach when the SC ousted CJ by quo warranto. Impeachment is for officials who are rightfully seated in their office (ab initio valid), the quo warranto when ab initio the official was invalidly seated i.e., from the very beginning because of some basic requirements, Sereno was not the legitimate CJ. Hence, impeachment cannot proceed in the Senate since Sereno was ousted by quo warranto. Impeachment is moot. Hence, Justice Martires was correct when he remarked that the SC did not oust the CJ because in the first place she was not the CJ.

[iamregger]

Tagging all the Senators who signed the resolution!
I quote, "Oh my God! No." - Ex Assoc. Justice Mendoza.

[mageinteriors]

Nakinig na naman kayo kay Karen Davila. Ang sabi ni Pimentel, "when the articles of impeachment has reached the senate and the senate has convened as an impeachment court trying the case of CJ Sereno".

What Pimentel said was the Senate as an impeachment court, while trying the case of CJ Sereno, will consider the High Court's decision (in case the SC decides in favor of the Quo Warranto petition) with respect to the Senate's ongoing proceedings, whether or not to continue the trial. Scenario nga kasi. Ibig sabihin, nagconvene na ang Senate as an impeachment court when the Quo Warranto petition has been decided upon by the SC.

Siyempre, they will have to decide whether to continue or not. Some may consider continuing and other senators may decide to consider it moot and academic. Irregardless, they will have to decide.( Yan ang sabi ni Pimentel).
Second, Pimentel did not mention to "Reverse" the decision of the SC. Si Davila ang gumamit ng term na yan. The Senate as an impeachment court may decide on the basis of the merits of the case presented to them during the trial and, may decide to vote in favor of the petition for impeachment or may vote otherwise. Its decision is independent from the decision of the SC and so is the SC decision from the Senate. Thus, the Senate (as an impeachment court) in effect does not "Reverse" the decision of the SC. It may merely decide differently from the SC decision. It has no authority to impose over the SC moreso, "reversing" the decision of the SC. If indeed the Senate (as an impeachment court) decides in favor of Sereno while the SC has already decided in favor of the Quo Warranto petition, then that's where the constitutional crisis will arise in which Pimentel also acknowledges during the interview.

[pusangpula]

Karen bagy kayong magkasama ni hontiveros

[mannydumalaon]

Both foreigners discussing impeachment. Am not interested!!!!

[janrybarina]

kanta na muna kayo ng MY WAY kapamilya.. bahala na mawala si cardo makakalimotan din namin yan sana ma shutdown na abs..

[Whitesilver]

Pimentel is tuta ng mga LP. A big coward, no balls.

[reikofuentes]

Karen is really insisting on the question even though it was already answered.

[marcelomaliones]

TAMA..THE SENATE CANT REVIEW OR REVERSED THE DECISION OF THE SC...VERY WRONG SEPARATION OF POWER..

[nestorromande]

karen..in the first place invalid na ang appointment ni serena

[cherdren]

Pakinggang mabuti si Pimentel... Wag masyado magstick sa isang pirasong linya ng kabuuang sinabi

[darkknight]

The Senate cannot review the SC decision but should have insisted and asserted its rights and responsibility to tri an impeachable official before the SC resolve the quo waranto. Hindi nila ginawa yan because of the Senate weak leadership

[canamtravel]

And its clearly sounds karen davila is in the side of all trash.

[isiahjdelapaz]

Nawalan ng pagkakataon na magpasikat ang mga senador dahil. Wala na sa kanila. Impeacment pinalitan na ng quo warranto

[enricosantos]

Saan ba ngpunta ang kaso pg ng desisyon diba sa SC hindi sa senado pg validity ang pinag uusapan, hindi nga umabot sa senate c Sereno Ms kalad karen

[olivemonti]

Nanghamon pa c CJ na senat sya dpat litisin .at pag botohan don, ALam ni sereno na marami syang galamay don isa na c koko, Talaga namn don sa senate dapat kasi impeachable peole n govt ay SENATE COURT SUBALIT DATAPWAT ANG HINABLA DITO SA QUO WARRANTO AY ILEGAL ANG PAG PAPAUPO SA KANYA ! NANDAYA SYA )NAHALUNGKAT ITO KAYA kinatigan ng court ang Quo warranto..