La Salle prof, San Beda College of Law dean defends new CJ Teresita de Castro from critics who accused her as accuser, witness, judge etc.

The likes of Kiko Pangilinan and Rep. Gary Alejano couldn’t hide their huge disappointment after President Duterte named Teresita de Castroas the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court as shown in their respective reactions on Facebook.

LP’s social media influencers like Silent No More pH and Pinoy Ako blog have anchored their shame campaign against the new Chief Justice of the Supreme Court via a meme listing the controversial cases she voted for like the Marcos burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani, upholding the constitutionality of the imposition of Martial Law in Mindanao and the quo warranto case against Sereno.

Obviously, these controversial cases cater to the anti-Marcos and anti-Duterte crowd that the LP wants to consolidate for its political survival.

Check out the meme below from Silent No More pH.

If the new CJ of the Supreme Court has bitter critics in social media, she has found defenders from the academe who need no convincing to defend her from critics.

La Salle history professor Van Ybiernas took to Facebook debunking one of Silent No More pH allegations against CJ de Castro, that she was the accuser, witness, judge and the beneficiary of the quo warranto case against Sereno.

Ybiernas clarified that this isn’t so.

De Castro testified how Sereno mismanaged the Supreme Court, but she was judged on her qualifications based on the standards of the CJ.

Ybiernas said had Carpio applied for the CJ post, he would have benefited from the Sereno ouster and not de Castro because Duterte gave more weight on seniority.

Ybiernas remarked that the critics proved just one thing in choosing their angle of attack against CJ de Castro, they are just a bunch of morons and nothing else.

Nagpapakita lang talaga ng kabobohan ang umaatake ke CJ de Castro.

Siya daw ay nag-akusa, tumestigo, humusga at nakinabang.

Ampaw ang mga ulol!

Iba yung inakusa at tinestigo ni de Castro (tungkol sa maling pamamahala ni Sereno sa korte) at sa hinusgahan (qualification ni Sereno batay sa standards ng CJ).

Napakarami sa mga Mahistrado ang nag-akusa at tumestigo kay Sereno para sa maling pamamahala nya sa Korte. Marami rin ang humusga sa kanya sa quo warranto case. Isa sa kanila ang naturalmente “makikinabang” sa pagkatanggal ng pekeng CJ dahil nagdesisyon ang pangulo na igalang muli ang seniority sa korte.

Kung nag-apply nga si Antonio Carpio na pinaka-senior, hindi naman “makikinabang” sa husga si De Castro.

Paulit-ulit na lang.
Parati na lang.


San Beda College of Law dean Fr. Ranhillo Aquino also called de Castro’s appointment well-deserved and long due recognition for a career woman who decided as a judge should decide, not on the basis of whim, favor, friendship or animosity but based on the law.

Aquino lamented why critics would take it against her for voting in favor of unpopular cases like the Marcos burial, Sereno case among others.

Aquino asked should it not be the judge who takes the more popular position instead be suspect?

Aquino urged critics to review her ponencias and opinions to find out that de Castro cited facts and law in support of her position.

Why should the fact that Chief Justice Tess voted for the Burial of FM at the Libingan, voted for Quo Warranto to issue against Madam Maria Lourde Serreno and other contentious matters be taken against her? Should it not be the judge who takes the more popular position be suspect?

All that one has to do is to go over her ponencias and her opinions. She cited the facts and she pointed to the law in support of her position. She decided as a judge should decide, not on the basis of whim, favor, friendship or animosity. That she voted for a position that would earn her the ire of a noisy segment of our population should be taken in her favor, not against.

And she presided over the trial of Erap at the Sandiganbayan and voted for his conviction. Why is this not cited in her favor? But then it also has to be added that in a gesture of magnanimity, immediately after the judgment of conviction was promulgated, she granted the accused’s request that the house arrest that he had labored under be continued.

If we want career persons in the judiciary, then Tess de Castro is it — and the fact that she has only two months at the helm of the High Court is no argument against her appointment as all. Better a delayed recognition than none at all!

Your reaction?

Add Comment