Chavez v. Judicial and Bar Council (2012).pdf

G.R.$No.$202242$$July$17,$2012! $ FRANCISCO$I.$CHAVEZ,!Petitioner,! vs.! JUDICIAL$AND$BAR$COUNCIL,$SEN.$FRANCIS$JOSEPH$G.$ESCUDERO$ and$REP.$NIEL$C.$TUPAS,$JR.,!Respondents.! $ Facts:! The!case!is!in!relation!to!the!process!of!selecting!the!nominees!for!the! vacant! seat! of! Supreme! Court! Chief! Justice! following! Renato! Corona’s! departure.! ! Originally,!the!members!of!the!Constitutional!Commission!saw!the!need! to! create! a! separate,! competent! and! independent! body! to! recommend! nominees!to!the!President.!Thus,!it!conceived!of!a!body!representative! of!all!the!stakeholders!in!the!judicial!appointment!process!and!called!it! the!Judicial!and!Bar!Council!(JBC).! ! In! particular,! Paragraph! 1! Section! 8,! Article! VIII! of! the! Constitution! states!that!“(1)!A!Judicial!and!Bar!Council!is!hereby!created!under!the! supervision! of! the! Supreme! Court! composed! of! the! Chief! Justice! as! ex! officio! Chairman,! the! Secretary! of! Justice,! and! a! representative! of! the! Congress!as!ex!officio!Members,!a!representative!of!the!Integrated!Bar,! a! professor! of! law,! a! retired! Member! of! the! Supreme! Court,! and! a! representative! of! the! private! sector.”! In! compliance! therewith,! Congress,! from! the! moment! of! the! creation! of! the! JBC,! designated! one! representative!from!the!Congress!to!sit!in!the!JBC!to!act!as!one!of!the!ex! officio!members.! ! In!1994!however,!the!composition!of!the!JBC!was!substantially!altered.! Instead!of!having!only!seven!(7)!members,!an!eighth!(8th)!member!was! added! to! the! JBC! as! two! (2)! representatives! from! Congress! began! sitting!in!the!JBC!–!one!from!the!House!of!Representatives!and!one!from! the! Senate,! with! each! having! oneUhalf! (1/2)! of! a! vote.! During! the! existence! of! the! case,! Senator! Francis! Joseph! G.! Escudero! and! Congressman!Niel!C.!Tupas,!Jr.!(respondents)!simultaneously!sat!in!JBC! as!representatives!of!the!legislature.! ! It!is!this!practice!that!petitioner!has!questioned!in!this!petition.!

The! respondents! claimed! that! when! the! JBC! was! established,! the! framers! originally! envisioned! a! unicameral! legislative! body,! thereby! allocating! “a! representative! of! the! National! Assembly”! to! the! JBC.! The! phrase,! however,! was! not! modified! to! aptly! jive! with! the! change! to! bicameralism!which!was!adopted!by!the!Constitutional!Commission!on! July!21,!1986.!The!respondents!also!contend!that!if!the!Commissioners! were!made!aware!of!the!consequence!of!having!a!bicameral!legislature! instead!of!a!unicameral!one,!they!would!have!made!the!corresponding! adjustment!in!the!representation!of!Congress!in!the!JBC;!that!if!only!one! house!of!Congress!gets!to!be!a!member!of!JBC!would!deprive!the!other! house!of!representation,!defeating!the!principle!of!balance.! ! The! respondents! further! argue! that! the! allowance! of! two! (2)! representatives!of!Congress!to!be!members!of!the!JBC!does!not!render! JBC’s!purpose!of!providing!balance!nugatory;!that!the!presence!of!two! (2)!members!from!Congress!will!most!likely!provide!balance!as!against! the!other!six!(6)!members!who!are!undeniably!presidential!appointees! ! Supreme!Court!held!that!it!has!the!power!of!review!the!case!herein!as!it! is!an!object!of!concern,!not!just!for!a!nominee!to!a!judicial!post,!but!for! all! the! citizens! who! have! the! right! to! seek! judicial! intervention! for! rectification!of!legal!blunders.! ! Issue:! Whether!or!not!the!current!practice!of!the!JBC!to!perform!its!functions! with! eight! (8)! members,! two! (2)! of! whom! are! members! of! Congress,! runs!counter!to!the!letter!and!spirit!of!the!1987!Constitution.! $ Held:! Yes.! The! current! practice! of! JBC! in! admitting! two! members! of! the! Congress! to! perform! the! functions! of! the! JBC! is! violative! of! the! 1987! Constitution.!As!such,!it!is!unconstitutional.! ! One! of! the! primary! and! basic! rules! in! statutory! construction! is! that! where!the!words!of!a!statute!are!clear,!plain,!and!free!from!ambiguity,!it! must! be! given! its! literal! meaning! and! applied! without! attempted! interpretation.! It! is! a! wellUsettled! principle! of! constitutional! construction! that! the! language! employed! in! the! Constitution! must! be! given! their! ordinary! meaning! except! where! technical! terms! are!

employed.!As!such,!it!can!be!clearly!and!unambiguously!discerned!from! Paragraph!1,!Section!8,!Article!VIII!of!the!1987!Constitution!that!in!the! phrase,!“a!representative!of!Congress,”!the!use!of!the!singular!letter!“a”! preceding! “representative! of! Congress”! is! unequivocal! and! leaves! no! room!for!any!other!construction.!It!is!indicative!of!what!the!members!of! the! Constitutional! Commission! had! in! mind,! that! is,! Congress! may! designate! only! one! (1)! representative! to! the! JBC.! Had! it! been! the! intention! that! more! than! one! (1)! representative! from! the! legislature! would!sit!in!the!JBC,!the!Framers!could!have,!in!no!uncertain!terms,!so! provided.! ! Moreover,!under!the!maxim!noscitur!a!sociis,!where!a!particular!word! or! phrase! is! ambiguous! in! itself! or! is! equally! susceptible! of! various! meanings,! its! correct! construction! may! be! made! clear! and! specific! by! considering!the!company!of!words!in!which!it!is!founded!or!with!which! it!is!associated.!Every!meaning!to!be!given!to!each!word!or!phrase!must! be!ascertained!from!the!context!of!the!body!of!the!statute!since!a!word! or!phrase!in!a!statute!is!always!used!in!association!with!other!words!or! phrases! and! its! meaning! may! be! modified! or! restricted! by! the! latter.! Applying!the!foregoing!principle!to!this!case,!it!becomes!apparent!that! the! word! “Congress”! used! in! Article! VIII,! Section! 8(1)! of! the! Constitution! is! used! in! its! generic! sense.! No! particular! allusion! whatsoever! is! made! on! whether! the! Senate! or! the! House! of! Representatives! is! being! referred! to,! but! that,! in! either! case,! only! a! singular!representative!may!be!allowed!to!sit!in!the!JBC! ! Considering!that!the!language!of!the!subject!constitutional!provision!is! plain!and!unambiguous,!there!is!no!need!to!resort!extrinsic!aids!such!as! records! of! the! Constitutional! Commission.! Nevertheless,! even! if! the! Court! should! proceed! to! look! into! the! minds! of! the! members! of! the! Constitutional! Commission,! it! is! undeniable! from! the! records! thereof! that! it! was! intended! that! the! JBC! be! composed! of! seven! (7)! members! only.! The! underlying! reason! leads! the! Court! to! conclude! that! a! single! vote!may!not!be!divided!into!half!(1/2),!between!two!representatives!of! Congress,! or! among! any! of! the! sitting! members! of! the! JBC! for! that! matter.! ! With! the! respondents’! contention! that! each! representative! should! be! admitted! from! the! Congress! and! House! of! Representatives,! the!

Supreme! Court,! after! the! perusal! of! the! records! of! Constitutional! Commission,!held!that!“Congress,”!in!the!context!of!JBC!representation,! should! be! considered! as! one! body.! While! it! is! true! that! there! are! still! differences!between!the!two!houses!and!that!an!interUplay!between!the! two! houses! is! necessary! in! the! realization! of! the! legislative! powers! conferred! to! them! by! the! Constitution,! the! same! cannot! be! applied! in! the! case! of! JBC! representation! because! no! liaison! between! the! two! houses! exists! in! the! workings! of! the! JBC.! No! mechanism! is! required! between!the!Senate!and!the!House!of!Representatives!in!the!screening! and!nomination!of!judicial!officers.!Hence,!the!term!“Congress”!must!be! taken!to!mean!the!entire!legislative!department.! ! The! framers! of! Constitution,! in! creating! JBC,! hoped! that! the! private! sector!and!the!three!branches!of!government!would!have!an!active!role! and! equal! voice! in! the! selection! of! the! members! of! the! Judiciary.! Therefore,!to!allow!the!Legislature!to!have!more!quantitative!influence! in!the!JBC!by!having!more!than!one!voice!speak,!whether!with!one!full! vote! or! oneUhalf! (1/2)! a! vote! each,! would! “negate! the! principle! of! equality! among! the! three! branches! of! government! which! is! enshrined! in!the!Constitution.”! ! It! is! clear,! therefore,! that! the! Constitution! mandates! that! the! JBC! be! composed! of! seven! (7)! members! only.! Thus,! any! inclusion! of! another! member,!whether!with!one!whole!vote!or!half!(1/2)!of!it,!goes!against! that! mandate.! Section! 8(1),! Article! VIII! of! the! Constitution,! providing! Congress! with! an! equal! voice! with! other! members! of! the! JBC! in! recommending! appointees! to! the! Judiciary! is! explicit.! Any! circumvention! of! the! constitutional! mandate! should! not! be! countenanced!for!the!Constitution!is!the!supreme!law!of!the!land.!The! Constitution! is! the! basic! and! paramount! law! to! which! all! other! laws! must!conform!and!to!which!all!persons,!including!the!highest!officials!of! the!land,!must!defer.!Constitutional!doctrines!must!remain!steadfast!no! matter!what!may!be!the!tides!of!time.!It!cannot!be!simply!made!to!sway! and! accommodate! the! call! of! situations! and! much! more! tailor! itself! to! the!whims!and!caprices!of!the!government!and!the!people!who!run!it.! ! Notwithstanding! its! finding! of! unconstitutionality! in! the! current! composition! of! the! JBC,! all! its! prior! official! actions! are! nonetheless! valid.! In! the! interest! of! fair! play! under! the! doctrine! of! operative! facts,!

actions! previous! to! the! declaration! of! unconstitutionality! are! legally! recognized.!They!are!not!nullified.! ! WHEREFORE,( the( petition( is( GRANTED.( The( current( numerical( composition( of( the( Judicial( and( Bar( Council( IS( declared( UNCONSTITUTIONAL.(The(Judicial(and(Bar(Council(is(hereby(enjoined(to( reconstitute( itself( so( that( only( one( (( 1)( member( of( Congress( will( sit( as( a( representative( in( its( proceedings,( in( accordance( with( Section( 8(( 1( ),( Article( VIII( of( the( 1987( Constitution.( This( disposition( is( immediately( executory.! ! It!is!evident!that!the!definition!of!“Congress”!as!a!bicameral!body!refers! to! its! primary! function! in! government! –! to! legislate.! In! the! passage! of! laws,! the! Constitution! is! explicit! in! the! distinction! of! the! role! of! each! house!in!the!process.!The!same!holds!true!in!Congress’!nonUlegislative! powers.! An! interUplay! between! the! two! houses! is! necessary! in! the! realization! of! these! powers! causing! a! vivid! dichotomy! that! the! Court! cannot!simply!discount.!This,!however,!cannot!be!said!in!the!case!of!JBC! representation!because!no!liaison!between!the!two!houses!exists!in!the! workings!of!the!JBC.!Hence,!the!term!“Congress”!must!be!taken!to!mean! the! entire! legislative! department.! The! Constitution! mandates! that! the! JBC!be!composed!of!seven!(7)!members!only.! !