SUPREME Court Associate Justice Teresita Leonardo-de Castro told lawmakers during the House impeachment hearing Monday the P250,000 monthly fee Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno had given to a female information technology consultant was too high and could have beaten the salaries of all SC justices.
“We [SC justices] were surprised to hear that the IT consultant was getting that much, which is higher than what the basic pay of SC justices are receiving (sic),” De Castro told lawmakers.
De Castro, former Sandiganbayan associate justice, said she had been “in-charge” of the judiciary’s “computerization,” and yet she never knew nor heard of Helen Macasaet—the supposed IT expert whose services were tapped by Sereno.
“I am the justice in charge of computerization but I never heard or knew that she was hired. There was one time where she made a presentation, but that was it,” de Castro said.
During an earlier impeachment hearing, it was revealed that the high court under Sereno’s watch had paid a total of P12 million to Macasaet, for only five years – from 2013 to 2017.
Deputy Court Administrator Raul Villanueva, head of the SC bids and awards committee, earlier told the House justice committee that the SC, through Sereno’s instructions, paid roughly about P2.4 million a year—or P200,000 a month—to Macasaet.
In Monday’s impeachment proceeding, SC Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo could not tell if there was an indeed an SC en banc resolution which legitimized the IT consultant’s services.
In a related development:
-Supreme Court Associate Justice Andres Reyes on Monday said Sereno prevented him from paying a courtesy call on President Rodrigo Duterte in Malacañang in 2016, even as he said the chief justice threatened him that it would be the “end of his career” should he push through with it.
At the resumption of the House of Representatives’ committee on justice hearing, Reyes said Sereno—an appointee of former President Benigno Aquino III—would find it “insulting” for the CA justices to meet with President Duterte.
“She (Sereno) told me this might end your career,” Reyes told lawmakers.
Reyes recalled: “I remember right after the election of the President, two justices told me a lot are requesting for an audience with the President, [and] asked me if it was possible to go as a group. I said of course, let us do it.”
He said the two justices were CA justices Agnes Reyes-Carpio and Socorro Inting.
Reyes said he then prepared a letter and would have it coordinated with the Office of the President.
But as a matter of courtesy, Reyes said he asked for Sereno’s permission and submitted their request letter to her office.
But Sereno disapproved of the plan of the CA justices.
“When I arrived at the office of the chief justice, she was not smiling at me. She said I don’t like your letter, she said your letter is insulting to me and the en banc; you make it appear that we are not doing anything at the SC, with a letter discussing our problems with the President, and that’s insulting to us.
“Your letter talks about discussing problems (in the Judiciary) with the President and that’s an insult to us. That is a big embarrassment to me,” Reyes, whose nomination as SC associate justice was eventually supported by Sereno, said.
This prompted him to apologize to the Chief Justice, Reyes said.
“Then she told me, the President is talkative, he says a lot of things, he might tell you things and you won’t be able to say anything back,’” Reyes said.
“I apologized again,” and she added “this might end your career.”
“I said, I don’t have a mean bone in my body, and she told me you better cancel that courtesy call to (sic) Malacañang and I canceled my courtesy call,” Reyes added.
Reyes, former Court of Appeals Presiding Justice, testified on the allegation that Sereno betrayed the public trust for trying to prevent CA justices from paying a courtesy call on President Duterte—as alleged by lawyer Larry Gadon in his impeachment complaint.
“Responding to the publicized courtesy call of 36 Court of Appeals Justices in Malacañang on August 23, 2016, as well as the courtesy call of four Sandiganbayan Justices in Davao City on 4 August 2016, Respondent Sereno reminded members of the Judiciary to be mindful of their actions that could be seen as compromising their independence,” the complaint said.
Gadon accused Sereno of “transgressing a mere reminder” when she prevented Reyes from paying the President a courtesy call.
This developed as Associate Justice Mariano del Castillo took the cudgels up for Sereno over the chief justice’s controversial acquisition of the P5.2-million sports utility vehicle.
Del Castillo told the House impeachment panel there was nothing irregular in the procurement of the Land Cruiser made by the Chief Justice.
“As far as I am concerned, this case was raffled [off] to me, the roll was given to me, I went over the roll, bidding was published in the Philippine Star. I find the procurement process in order, then there’s the law allowing the exemption of the Chief Justice from the ban on luxury cars,” Del Castillo told the House justice committee.
“So, in other words, there was no legal basis for me to deny the recommendation; so I passed it on to the court,” Del Castillo added, referring to Administrative Order 233 series of 2008.
The AO prohibits government officials and employees from acquiring luxury service vehicles, except for five officials of the country, including the Chief Justice.
The impeachment complainant Gadon accuses Sereno of corruption for allegedly using the taxpayers’ money to purchase the luxury vehicle.
But Sereno denied the allegation.
Del Castillo also said Sereno “death threats” prompted her to acquire the said luxury vehicle, saying the prerogative to choose a preferred vehicle was “not exclusive” to the chief justice.
He said associate justices were asked, too.
Nevertheless, Del Castillo said he did not have any idea on the allegation that the acquisition of the vehicle was “predetermined.”
“We only learned the Land Cruiser had been predetermined during a testimony in the House impeachment hearing,” he said.
“Just like our service vehicles they’re not in our names. They’re in the name of the SC,” Del Castillo added.
Villanueva earlier testified that Macasaet was initially given a P100,000 monthly fee.
The fee was later upgraded to P250,000 which was never sanctioned but ended up in a “negotiated procurement,” where the “main criteria was the trust and confidence of the procuring agency” or end-user (Sereno), he added.
Villanueva said the BAC considered two other names for the position.
However, Macasaet’s name was supplied by the Office of the Chief Justice, being the procuring office along with the Management Information System Office.
Villanueva also testified that BAC only considered the October 2013 and May 2014 contract of Macasaet, who served at the SC from 2013 to 2017.
The subsequent renewals were done by Sereno’s office.
Villanueva said Macasaet’s consultancy contract was renewed six times, amounting to P1.5 million each, or a total of P9 million.