SC junks request of online media firm for retired justices’ SALNs, PDS

By on February 8, 2015


The Supreme Court of the Philippines building in Manila, Philippines. Photo by Mike Gonzalez / Wikimedia Commons.
The Supreme Court of the Philippines building in Manila, Philippines. Photo by Mike Gonzalez / Wikimedia Commons.

MANILA — The Supreme Court (SC) has dismissed the request of an online media company for copies of the Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) and Personal Data Sheet (PDS) or curriculum vitae of the retired justices of the SC and officers and employees of the Judiciary.

In a Jan. 13, 2015 resolution promulgated by Clerk of Court Atty. Enriqueta E. Vidal, the SC denied the letter-request of Reynaldo C. Santos Jr., senior researcher of Rappler.com, for copies of the 2004-2011 SALNs and PDS of the retired justices of the SC, the Court of Appeals (CA) and the Court of Tax Appeals (CTA).

The SC said that these justices are no longer within the administrative jurisdiction of the Court.

“The Court Resolves.. to deny the request of Reynaldo C. Santos Jr., Senior Researcher, Rappler.com for copies of the 2004-2011 SALN and PDS of the retired Justices of the Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and the Court of Tax Appeals, considering that the aforesaid former members of the Judiciary are no longer within the jurisdiction of the Court,” the resolution said.

“Provided, however, that earlier requests favorably acted upon by the Court through previous resolutions involving members of the Judiciary who were then in the active service shall be respected, subject to payment of the required fees,” the SC said.

The SC also reminded Rappler to comply with the requirements faithfully and any violation would subject them to criminal, civil and administrative liability.

“To faithfully comply with his undertaking and declaration in the request form and that any violation thereof will subject him to the liability imposed under Section 11, Republic Act No. 6713, in addition to any criminal, civil or administrative liability,” the SC said.