With the current onslaught on Ma. Lourdes Sereno’s clinging to her post despite her utter lack of qualifications as accused by those who voted and are against her to continue as Chief Justice; more and more people who are identified as Duterte supporters—the likes of GMA Network’s consultant-writer Suzette Doctolero shared the same thoughts as she reposted via facebook the post by an equally controversial young filmmaker named Jason Paul Laxamana.
Laxamana simply captioned his post as ‘Throwback’; but Doctorlero made sure that she drove her point by putting in her thoughts: “Ang CJ na ipinatatanggol nyo ay siya ring CJ na puppet ng mga Aquino at nagkanulo sa mga magsasaka ng Luisita. Tapos si Digong ang distador?”
The article that the filmmaker shared was from News.ABS-CBN.com and was published on March 6, 2012, written by Ina Reformina.
Based on the article, it mentioned that: “Farmers of Hacienda Luisita have accused Supreme Court (SC) Associate Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno of “selling out” her concurring and dissenting opinion in the landmark Hacienda Luisita agrarian reform dispute case in exchange for her alleged bid to be the next Chief Justice.
“A small group of farmers belonging to the Alyansa ng mga Manggagawang Bukid sa Asyenda Luisita (Ambala) and Unyon ng mga Mangagawa sa Agrikultura (Uma) held a picket at the Supreme Court this morning, urging the High Court to issue a final ruling favorable to over 6,000 of the Cojuangco-owned sugar estate’s farm workers.
“During the demonstration, the farmers slammed Sereno, who, in her opinion, said Hacienda Luisita, Inc. (HLI) and Luisita Realty, Inc. shall be entitled to the payment of just compensation for the agricultural lands based on their fair market value as of Jan. 2, 2006.”
In an article ‘Check my voting pattern, Sereno dares critics’ from Rappler.com, dated and published on August 28, 2013 and was penned under Paterno Esmaquel II’s byline, it read: “She dissented, for instance, in the majority SC opinion that ordered the distribution of the Hacienda Luisita, which was owned by the Cojuangco side of the Aquino family, to farmers. While she voted in favor of land distribution, she pegged the valuation of the land at a higher price.
“Sereno was also tapped as a witness by the prosecution in the impeachment case against her predecessor, ousted Chief Justice Renato Corona. She was, however, barred by the SC from appearing before it.
“She also had a history as a dissenter under the Corona court.”
All these stuff that both Doctolero and Laxamana’s quiet opinion on the Chief Justice in questioned have bases after all.
Based on another article ‘[OPINION] The options of Chief Justice Sereno’ published by Rappler.com on May 9 and was written by Tony La Viña, he listed how Sereno should respond in case the majority of 8 members of the Supreme Court could decide to remove a sitting Chief Justice; and one of which is “Another extreme response is to simply accept the decision and to leave quietly. Unconditional acceptance of the decision would make the Chief Justice an accomplice to the death of constitutional rule in the country.”
