JARDELEZA vs.

CJ SERENO
FACTS
The JBC disqualified Jardeleza after Sereno invoked Rule 10, Section 2, of
the JBC 009 with a provision that when the integrity of an applicant who
is not otherwise disqualified for nomination is raised or challenged, the
affirmative vote of all the members of the Council must be obtained for
the favorable consideration of his nomination.

In view of this, Jardeleza then filed a petition contending on the illegality

of his exclusion from the shortlisted applicants violating his right to due
process. Jardeleza argued that he was not only deprived of an opportunity
to mount a proper defense against himself but his rights as an applicant
under sections 3 and 4 Rule 4, JBC-009 was also divested

ISSUE
Does the "unanimity rule" apply in cases where the main point of
contention is the professional judgment sans charges or implications of
immoral or corrupt behavior?
RULING
Rule 10, Section 2 of JBC 009 elicits that when an applicants integrity is
being questioned, the voting requirement of his or her inclusion as
nominee to a judicial position becomes unanimous instead of the
majority vote. However, the application of such rule to Jardeleza was
misplaced. The invocation of the unanimity rule on integrity traces its
roots to the exercise of his discretion as a lawyer in defending a case for
the government and nothing else. While Jardelezas extra-marital affairs
and acts of insider trading fall within the contemplation of a question of
integrity, and warrants the application of unanimity rule, he was not
afforded due process in its application.
The court sees that the unanimity rule is vague and unfair which can be
abused considering that its definition has not been defined, distinctly
specified and delineated. It is effectively a veto power over the collective
will of a majority.
Considering the foregoing, the petition is granted. Jardeleza is deem
included in the shortlist submitted to the President for consideration as an
Associate Justice of the SC vice Abad. The JBC is also directed to review
and adopt rules relevant to the observance of due process.