MANILA, Philippines — Removing Supreme Court Associate Justice Marvic Leonen through quo warranto proceedings is not likely to prosper, a House of Representatives official said, claiming that a repeat of the impeachment case of former chief justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno will not be allowed.

“I believe that it was a mistake for the SC to proceed with the quo warranto especially because, at that time, Congress had already been hearing the impeachment,” Deputy Speaker Rufus Rodriguez said yesterday, referring to Sereno who was removed by the SC in May 2018.

The high tribunal earlier junked the move of private lawyer Larry Gadon and Solicitor General Jose Calida to have Leonen removed via the quo warranto route, borne out of his failure to declare his assets for a total of 15 years – more than Sereno’s six years of alleged omission.

A quo warranto petition seeks the removal of a public official based on questionable qualifications that include failure to comply with certain requirements for the position.

Rodriguez said the House would insist on the constitutional provision that gives the body the power and exclusive jurisdiction to be able to determine whether there is basis to send to the Senate the articles of impeachment against an impeachable official.

“That (Sereno case) cannot happen because the Constitution is very clear. Impeachable officials like SC justices can only be removed by impeachment. And the Constitution is supreme over the rules of court, definitely,” the Cagayan de Oro City congressman added.

Rodriguez sits as vice chairman of the House committee on justice that Leyte Rep. Vicente Veloso – a former Court of Appeals magistrate – heads.

But Gadon, who was instrumental in Sereno’s ouster and who initiated the impeachment against her in the House, disagreed with Rodriguez’s opinion, noting that he may be a law dean but he “cannot be more authoritative than the SC.”

“Impeachable offenses pertain to acts committed while in office. QW pertains to grounds prior to appointment such as lack of qualification,” Gadon explained.

“With all due respect to dean Rufus Rodriguez… we must be reminded that the SC is the final interpreter of the law. His interpretation of the law on removal of officials of the SC cannot be more superior than the SC itself when it ruled on the removal of Sereno. Perhaps he forgot the fact that the ground relied in the QW of Sereno is different from grounds of impeachment,” the lawyer of Edwin Cordevilla, who filed Leonen’s impeachment suit, insisted.

Rodriguez assured Leonen of the lawmakers’ absolute impartiality on the complaint.

“We will afford him all the opportunity. We’ll make sure that this will be fair and objective. The decision will be based on the merits. We will do what is necessary in accordance with the law,” he said.

Ako Bicol party-list Rep. Alfredo Garbin Jr., vice chairman of the House justice committee, said the members of the panel will decide on the merits of the case.

“We should stop saying that impeachment is just a numbers game. It’s not. We have rules to follow and we have to observe due process,” he said. “It will still depend on the appreciation of the members of the justice committee. The members will always decide on the merits.”