SC approves PCIJ request,
orders release of SALNs

IN WHAT MANY are hoping could be the end of a two-decade drought of information in the judiciary, the Supreme Court en banc approved an August 2012 request by the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism (PCIJ) for the release of the statements of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALNs) of all the sitting Supreme Court justices from the time they were appointed to the high tribunal until 2011.

A notice issued by Supreme Court Clerk of Court Enriqueta E. Vidal and released to the PCIJ states that the SALNs and Personal Data Sheets (PDS) of Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno and 13 other associate justices would be released to the PCIJ upon payment of the required fees.

The SALNs to be released to the PCIJ would include all SALNs filed by the sitting justices since they were appointed to the tribunal until the year 2011.

THE PCIJ had requested copies of the Supreme Court justices’s asset disclosure records on Aug, 14, 2012 yet, or 10 months before the high court finally approved it on Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

By then, the court had released the 2011 SALNs of the justices to just one media agency — Solar Network News.

PCIJ and Solar worked together to compare these SALNs with the SALNs that the justices had filed in previous years, some of which are available in the PCIJ Library.

The effort produced a four-part report, “The Wealth of the Gods of Padre Faura”, that PCIJ published in December 2012. Check it out here:

Part 1. SC justices among PH’s best paid; allowances, bonuses not in SALNs
Sidebar. COA the courageous
Sidebar. Money talk
Part 2. Corona’s fat allowances not taxed: Same, same still at SC?
Part 3. Rapidly rising net worth shared bliss of SC justices
Sidebar. Half a giga of data
Part 4. Transparency on ice: Judicial independence or impunity?
Sidebar. Sereno y Carpio

The PCIJ, however, has not yet received official or formal notice from the court that its August 14, 2012 petition for the release of the SALNs has been approved.

The tribunal’s decision was seen by freedom of information advocates as a major victory in the fight for transparency in the judiciary.

The asset records of the judiciary have been kept secret since 1992, through a series of self-serving resolutions and decisions by the Supreme Court virtually exempting it from a provision in the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards for Public Officials and Employees (Republic Act No. 6713) requiring that the asset records of government officials be made public, within 15 days from date of request by citizens.

The PCIJ has been filing yearly requests for access to the SALNs of the Supreme Court Justices, but the requests have been mostly ignored. In August last year, the tribunal opened the door a little when it granted the request by Solar News for the 2011 SALNs of the Supreme Court justices.

The PCIJ petition which was approved by the tribunal was filed on August 14, 2012 by PCIJ Executive Director Malou Mangahas. The approved petition covers the SALNs of the justices from the time they were appointed until the year 2011.

Atty. Nepomuceno Malaluan, convenor of the Right to Know, Right Now Coalition, of which the PCIJ is a member, called the decision “a very positive development” on the issue of transparency and accountability. However Malaluan said he hoped to see more clarity in the procedures for accessing future asset records in the judiciary.

“We welcome the SC decision to grant the PCIJ request for the release of the SALNs of the Justices,” Malaluan said. “We still hope to see greater procedural certainty in access to SALNs in the judiciary, but this is certainly a very positive development towards this.”

The PCIJ request for SALNs covered the following Supreme Court justices:

• Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno – SALNs and PDSs for 2010 and 2011;
• Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio – SALNS and PDSs from 2001-2011;
• Associate Justice Presbitero J. Velasco – SALNs and PDSs from 2002-2011;
• Associate Justice Teresita J. de Castro – SALNs and PDSs 2007-2011;
• Associate Justice Arturo D. Brion – SALNs and PDSs 2008-2011;
• Associate Justice Diosdado M. Peralta – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Lucas P. Bersamin – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Mariano C. del Castillo, SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Roberto A. Abad – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama Jr. – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Jose P. Perez – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Jose C. Mendoza – SALNs and PDSs 2009-2011;
• Associate Justice Bienvenido L. Reyes – SALN and PDS 2011;
• Associate Justice Estela M. Perlas-Bernabe – SALNs and PDS 2011

In compliance with the somewhat convoluted requirements set forth by the Supreme Court for the release of the justices’s SALNs, the PCIJ was required to justify its request for the documents by stating its purpose and the interests that the PCIJ sought to be served.

As well, the PCIJ and all the other individuals and organizations that had petitioned for SALNs from the SC were required to submit a long list of documents including affidavits and accreditation papers.

The Supreme Court had also made any decision for the release of the SALNs into a matter that must be discussed by the tribunal en banc. This is part may be the reason why the Court almost took an entire year to decide on the PCIJ petition.

In its application, the PCIJ said the SALNs would be used for research and journalistic output on the “accuracy and/or truthfulness of the declaration of assets and liabilities” of the Justices. As well, the PCIJ said it wished to track the growth or decline of the wealth of the members of the judiciary, and look into possible cases of conflict of interest.

The judiciary had proven to be the most difficult government branch to request SALNs from. The PCIJ, which has made it a habit to request SALNs and PDSs of all government officials annually, has been able to secure SALNs from the Executive and the Senate. However, the House of Representatives has complied irregularly with the requirement for the publication of their SALNs, depending on the temper of the current House leadership.

It was the judiciary however that proved to be the toughest nut to crack. The Supreme Court, in particular, had stonewalled on requests for SALNs since the time of Supreme Court Chief Justice Andres Narvasa.

The Narvasa court had ruled that the SALNs of all members of the judiciary were confidential, on account of alleged fears that the documents would be used to blackmail officers of the court.