Home » Archives » 04. December 2005

Scrapping the Chief Justice Interviews

December 4, 2005

Rizalist pointed out Ricky Carandang’s take on the Judicial and Bar Council’s decision not to push through with the public interviews of the candidates for the post of Chief Justice. They did this because 12 of the Justices of the Supreme Court sent a letter to the JBC expressing their objections to the interview upon the following grounds:

The justices pointed out that from the time the 1987 Constitution was adopted, the JBC never interviewed nominees who are already incumbent SC justices.

They also stressed that the Chief Justice was not the chief executive of the judiciary nor of the high court. Hence, if the JBC was interested in finding out how the nominees intended to manage or administer the judiciary, the exercise was pointless, the 12 justices said.

Instead of interviewing the nominees, they said the JBC should examine their judicial philosophy expressed in their written decisions.

As before, I can’t help but disagree with the High Court.

Ricky Carandang is right.  It’s all about transparency.  To that, I add that all of the Justices seem to be oblivious to the conflict-of-interest here.  After all, this precedent exempts all of them from being interviewed should any of them be  nominated to the position of Chief Justice.  On that ground alone, the JBC should have dismissed the letter out of hand.  After all, like the Supreme Court, the JBC is a Constitutional body.

More importantly, the JBC was created as a replacement to the open-house grilling of candidates before the Commission on Appointments.  The High Court’s move to put a veil on the proceedings leads me to believe that perhaps a return to the CA would be a better move.  In this sense, perhaps it’s good Constitutional changes are being discussed.  This should be thrown into the mix.  (more…)

Posted by JJ Disini at 11:57 pm | permalink | Add comment