They were avoiding the fact that Sereno didn't file or submit more than ten years of SALN which in the case of Corona filed but only missed declaring some properties.
Fyi.... in the case of cj Corona, there was no hearing held at th house of representative.... Kindly validate the information you talk about, it could help you not look like a dumb person in live tv.... -xxx
Rules in this case were laid by the JBC and to ignore one in favor of any particular candidate is dishonest, blatantly wrong and unfair. Hilbay is wrong. Rules even in a simple game of basketball, are RULES
*The SALN requirement is just an internal rule of the JBC. It is not a constitutional requirement. So the JBC can waive the requirement since it's only an internal rule.*
Bon Bing, you should have listened to all the proceedings and discussions before you open your mouth. And you think the matter was a molehill? Sereno is in hot water! Where did you get your ¨wisdom?¨ From your wisdom thought? Why don´t you explain that to Lower House who impeached Sereno and to Solgen Calida who filed the quo warranto? Do you think these people are stupid? Or you are?
it's actually not a desire to remove an illegally appointed official/s but rather a desire to validate an appointment. If this issue is not addressed by the SC, anyone appointed who is lacking in legal requirements can sit in an office that's not theirs in the first place. This is the kind of confusion that the Philippine constitution creates...once and for all, address the issue/s!!! For heaven's sake, why can't you lawmakers create a more sensible, concise and enforceable laws??? There are so much flaws in the Phil constitution that are subject to anyone's interpretation.
Under the constitution article VIII section 8 the sole responsible on qualifying the nomination of a judiciary candidate is the judicial and bar council deems all its decision is valid then its appointee is valid and qualify to the certain position. It was never written on rule 4 section 1 of the judicial and bar council's rule that the candidates integrity is based on SALN's.
Tweet: Yes, you should remove her if her crime is serious enough to warrant a removal. The constitution cannot possibly favor a public servant to remain in office after a serious crime has been committed, correct? Constitutional Lawyers know ahead of time before taking the oath of office that no one is above the Law, right? She has to leave.
If hilbay talked this way during corona's case, he would've sounded reasonable...:) And, by the way, it was public knowledge that the congressmen (lower and upper house) were 'rewarded' for moving on with the impeachment of Corona. No mention of that part Hilbay and Karen? C'mon...
Wala ka nang dapat intindihin sir,ang supreme court lang ang nakaalam kahit ano pa ang dadak mo hindi paniwLaan ng ibang nakapaligid lalo na sa ibang tao
Wag mo na i-interpret yung constitution, Hilbay. Nililito mo lang ako. Sinasabi mo ba na hindi alam ng SolGen Calida at SC ang ginagawa nila? Ang simple naman ata ng trabaho ng SC kung ang mga kelangan nila ientertain with regards sa quo warranto ay "mandatory constitutional requirement", at yung hindi pag file ng SALN ay hindi na nila scope.
![24 Oras Express: November 29, 2024 [HD]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ynV59MfqWg/mqdefault.jpg)
![24 Oras Express: November 29, 2024 [HD]](/img/tr.png)
They were avoiding the fact that Sereno didn't file or submit more than ten years of SALN which in the case of Corona filed but only missed declaring some properties.
Fyi.... in the case of cj Corona, there was no hearing held at th house of representative.... Kindly validate the information you talk about, it could help you not look like a dumb person in live tv....
-xxx
Rules in this case were laid by the JBC and to ignore one in favor of any particular candidate is dishonest, blatantly wrong and unfair. Hilbay is wrong. Rules even in a simple game of basketball, are RULES
*The SALN requirement is just an internal rule of the JBC. It is not a constitutional requirement. So the JBC can waive the requirement since it's only an internal rule.*
Yes, the rule should apply to all. In this case, to all applicants for the Supreme Court Justice Chief.
*The rule was waived not only for Sereno.*
*Sparky, you should know the difference between a Constitutional requirement and an internal rule. You just can't make mountains out of molehills.*
Bon Bing, you should have listened to all the proceedings and discussions before you open your mouth. And you think the matter was a molehill? Sereno is in hot water! Where did you get your ¨wisdom?¨ From your wisdom thought? Why don´t you explain that to Lower House who impeached Sereno and to Solgen Calida who filed the quo warranto?
Do you think these people are stupid? Or you are?
it's actually not a desire to remove an illegally appointed official/s but rather a desire to validate an appointment. If this issue is not addressed by the SC, anyone appointed who is lacking in legal requirements can sit in an office that's not theirs in the first place. This is the kind of confusion that the Philippine constitution creates...once and for all, address the issue/s!!! For heaven's sake, why can't you lawmakers create a more sensible, concise and enforceable laws??? There are so much flaws in the Phil constitution that are subject to anyone's interpretation.
I agree with you, Bechay AZ. You r absolutely rirght.
Under the constitution article VIII section 8 the sole responsible on qualifying the nomination of a judiciary candidate is the judicial and bar council deems all its decision is valid then its appointee is valid and qualify to the certain position. It was never written on rule 4 section 1 of the judicial and bar council's rule that the candidates integrity is based on SALN's.
Tweet: Yes, you should remove her if her crime is serious enough to warrant a removal. The constitution cannot possibly favor a public servant to remain in office after a serious crime has been committed, correct? Constitutional Lawyers know ahead of time before taking the oath of office that no one is above the Law, right? She has to leave.
If hilbay talked this way during corona's case, he would've sounded reasonable...:) And, by the way, it was public knowledge that the congressmen (lower and upper house) were 'rewarded' for moving on with the impeachment of Corona. No mention of that part Hilbay and Karen? C'mon...
Quo Warranto, said shall be and may be pleased read and make the comment.
Khalid Morales ...and so it is written.
Wala ka nang dapat intindihin sir,ang supreme court lang ang nakaalam kahit ano pa ang dadak mo hindi paniwLaan ng ibang nakapaligid lalo na sa ibang tao
Wag mo na i-interpret yung constitution, Hilbay. Nililito mo lang ako. Sinasabi mo ba na hindi alam ng SolGen Calida at SC ang ginagawa nila? Ang simple naman ata ng trabaho ng SC kung ang mga kelangan nila ientertain with regards sa quo warranto ay "mandatory constitutional requirement", at yung hindi pag file ng SALN ay hindi na nila scope.
Nag dunong-dunongan lang iyang si Hilbay.
Nag dunong-dunongan lang iyang si Hilbay. Katulad rin iyan ng IBP president na si Fajardo. Nagpapansin, mali naman.