In a move that has caught many by surprise, Chief Justice Reynato Puno has sounded off his colleagues about the possibility of retiring early—way before his term ends in May 2010.

The chief justice has mentioned this in conversations with former Supreme Court justices, at least one Court insider, Senate President Manuel Villar, and a lawyer close to him.

We interviewed some of them and they requested not to be named because their conversations were private and their disclosures are sensitive.

We asked Villar, through his public relations officer, to comment but we were told that he could not be reached. He is attending the International Parliamentary Union conference in Cape Town, South Africa.

We sent a letter to Estelito Mendoza, considered by many to be Puno’s mentor, asking him about the report we got that Puno confided to him about his plans to retire early. But the former justice secretary told us through his secretary that he has no knowledge of it.

We also sent Puno a letter personally delivered to his office last Monday requesting an interview for this report. The Supreme Court public information office said this morning that the chief justice regrets that he cannot grant the interview.

Pro-administration Court?

The main reason Puno gave for mulling over cutting his term short, our sources say, is his frustration with leading a Court whose majority tend to decide cases in favor of the administration. In the recent Senate versus Neri case, nine justices voted to strengthen President Arroyo on the issue of executive privilege. Puno was with the minority, voting with six justices. (Please see: SC ruling on Neri may lead to cover up of crimes)

The Supreme Court decision put a lid on the Senate investigation of the allegedly overpriced national broadband deal. Former socio-economic planning secretary Romulo Neri can no longer be compelled to answer key questions on the role of President Arroyo in the bribery scandal.

Puno criticized the decision in an interview with Abs-cbn. “I am disappointed. I wrote a very long opinion. I tilted the balance of power in favor of Congress, and in my honest view, that ought to be the case,” Puno said. Puno wrote a 120-page dissenting opinion which was made available to justice reporters even before the official announcement of the results of the voting.

In private, he told some of the justices that he expects the way the justices voted on the Neri case to hold for the rest of President Arroyo’s term for important cases. Arroyo’s tenure ends in June 2010.

Problems in SC

But even before the Neri case was decided, in early February, Puno already talked about the resignation or retirement option. “There are many problems in the Court, including (lack of) resources, dealing with people who resist change,” our source quotes Puno as saying. “But what bothers me more is the Court itself. I’m not sure if I can hold on to this…”

The context for the conversation was the Chavez versus National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) case where the High Court ruled, 9-6, that the warnings issued by the Department of Justice and the NTC against media on the airing of the “Hello, Garci” tapes constituted prior constraint. The tape caught the President and then Comelec Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano discussing the results of the 2004 presidential elections.

The majority included Puno. (Please see: SC favors airing of ‘Hello Garci’)

Despite their victory, our source says that Puno was apparently unhappy that only nine out of the 15 justices joined the majority. We earlier reported that the Palace lost the case because it miscalculated how the voting would go. (Please see: SC ruling on Neri shows a Palace-controlled Court: sources)

Give way to Quisumbing?

Lawyers who’ve worked with Puno say they find it hard to understand why the chief justice is considering leaving the High Court.

“It’s a challenge for him, to exert his leadership,” a former Supreme Court justice said. “No president will give the chief justice a court that will follow him. As first among equals, he defines the quality of his leadership, unifies the Court, and earns their respect. Every chief justice has his problems.”

This view is shared by a number of lawyers inside and outside the Supreme Court.

In our interviews, we found out that one possible reason Puno is considering leaving the Court early is to give way to the most senior justice, Leonardo Quisumbing, to be chief justice. Both Puno and Quisumbing are the only remaining appointees of former President Ramos in the 15-member body.

A friend of Quisumbing said that the justice had mentioned to him about the “possibility” of Puno’s early retirement in which case Quisumbing would take over as chief justice.

Another friend of Quisumbing said that the position of chief justice was “dangled” to him during the time the SC was deciding on the people’s initiative case in 2006—apparently to get his vote.

We sent questions to Quisumbing but he has not replied to them. His office said that he had read our letter.

JDV and term-sharing

We asked former House Speaker Jose de Venecia, who pushed for PI, whether there was indeed a proposed term-sharing agreement between Puno and Quisumbing. He confirmed that he and other Lakas leaders had brought it up.

“Many were for Puno and many were for Quisumbing,” de Venecia told us in a telephone interview. “That’s why we proposed term-sharing between the two.”

However, de Venecia said that he is not aware if this proposal reached President Arroyo and if Puno and Quisumbing agreed to it. “It was only exploratory,” he pointed out.

Term-sharing for chief justice, lawyers say, is “reprehensible because public office is beyond the commerce of man…it shouldn’t be the subject of negotiations.”

It was a politically charged time then, when the Supreme Court was deliberating on the people’s initiative case. In a close vote, 8-7, the SC stopped PI. Quisumbing and Puno were among those who voted for PI.

The petition filed by Raul Lambino sought to convene Congress as a constituent assembly and amend the Constitution. The overall intent of the constitutional amendment was to extend President Arroyo’s term of office as well as those of the members of the new parliament.

Rivals

What puzzles Puno’s colleagues is the fact that he had wanted the position—and is now thinking of running away from it after a little over a year in office. During this time, Puno took a high profile and started to define himself as a civil libertarian, strong on human rights issues.

The Puno Court implemented the writ of amparo as well as the writ of habeas data. Before that, Puno convened a summit on extrajudicial killings, unprecedented in Supreme Court history.

His colleagues recall that when then Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban was about to retire in December 2006, Puno, the most senior justice, was expected to be named chief justice.

Earlier, in 2005, he was bypassed in favor of Panganiban. This time, Puno wanted to make sure he got the appointment. He reportedly approached a person close to President Arroyo to get the assurance.

When he was rebuffed, Puno did not take Panganiban’s appointment lightly. He did not report for work for several days. He quit most of his committee positions except as chair of the committee on rules.

The second time around, Puno’s rivals were Quisumbing and Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago. Santiago’s nomination however was not considered by the Judicial and Bar Council, which screens and submits to the President the short list for nominees in the judiciary.

Quisumbing lobbied for the post, sources privy to Quisumbing’s moves told us. He eventually cooled off and reportedly said that he would give way to Puno.

Puno was appointed chief justice. Before it was made public, we learned that President Arroyo met with Quisumbing in private.

The circumstances surrounding Puno’s oath-taking in Malacanang were unusual. He was summoned to the Palace very late at night, and at 11:15pm, close to midnight of December 6, 2006, he took his oath. Only one justice was present (Dante Tinga) as most of the justices were not informed.

That was the day Panganiban retired thus the rush.

Implications

What will Puno’s early retirement mean for the Supreme Court?

For President Arroyo, it will mean that she can appoint a new chief justice and an additional associate justice—giving her a broader sweep of the Court. (Please see: Stacking the Court)

If Quisumbing takes over, he retires in November 2009. President Arroyo will appoint a new chief justice whom, SC insiders say, will most likely be Renato Corona.

If seniority were followed, it should be Antonio Carpio’s turn to be CJ. But because of his independent stance, our sources say that the President will bypass him in favor of Corona, who retires in 2018. This will deny the next President, who has a term of six years, the chance of appointing the next CJ.

Corona, former chief of staff of President Arroyo when she was vice-president, has always voted for the administration in major cases. These highly politically charged cases include the executive privilege petition of socioeconomic planning secretary Romulo Neri; the “Hello Garci” wiretap case; the constitutionality of Proclamation No. 427 and General Order No. 4 declaring “a state of rebellion” and calling on the Armed Forces to suppress the rebellion; the constitutionality of PP 1017 declaring a state of emergency, among others.

In effect, a Court insider said, “by retiring early, Puno will be delivering the Supreme Court to GMA.”

If Puno stays, President Arroyo will be unable to appoint a new chief justice since he will retire in May 2010. That period will be covered by an appointment ban since it will be election season. The next president, therefore, will appoint the new chief justice.

Fernan, Narvasa and Concepcion

There have been cases in the past when chief justices retired ahead of schedule. In 1991, then Chief Justice Marcelo Fernan quit to run for president. He had only assumed the post in 1988 and was due to retire in 1997. He eventually run for vice-president but lost.

Andres Narvasa succeeded Fernan. There was talk then among Court insiders that Fernan and Narvasa had agreed on sharing a term. But this has not been confirmed although sources we interviewed believed there was such an agreement.

But in Fernan’s case, “there was no exceptional circumstance” for his abbreviated tenure in the SC since he was actually eyeing an elective post and only used the CJ post as springboard to enhance his chances in the elections,” one of our sources observed.

The more dramatic resignation is that of Chief Justice Roberto Concepcion in April 1973. Concepcion, in Javellana vs Executive Secretary—which questioned the legitimacy of the 1973 Constitution—voted against the Marcos Constitution.

Two months before he turned 70, he hung his robe.—with research by Purple Romero (abs-cbnNEWS.com/Newsbreak)

---

INTERACT WITH THIS ARTICLE