Sen. Miriam Defensor Santiago, a former UP law professor, in effect accused a former
chief justice, a former justice secretary, and the present Solicitor General of ignorance
of the law.
Santiago said Senate President Marcelo Fernan, a former chief justice, Sen. Teofisto
Guingona, a former justice secretary, and Solicitor General Ricardo Galvez all committed
unforgivable error in legal research.
She said the error was made when they filed their separate Comments on her petition for
quo warranto, questioning Guingonas right to hold the post of Minority Leader.
Santiago said the error of Fernan and Guingona occurred when they each cited a legal
encyclopedia called Corpus Juris Secundum.
In pleadings before the Supreme Court, a legal encyclopedia should never be
quoted or cited as an authority. A legal encyclopedia is only a finding tool,
she said.
Santiago said pleadings before the appellate courts should cite only primary sources of
law, meaning the Constitution, statutes passed by Congress, and earlier cases decided by
the Supreme Court.
Santiago also criticized the Solicitor General for citing American cases.
Pleadings should cite only cases with mandatory authority, such as past decisions
of the Philippine Supreme Court. American cases only have persuasive authority, and
do not have to be followed in our country, she said.
Santiago assailed the legal research of the three men, after they filed their separate
Comments on her petition. She accused them of what she called erroneous
juriography, meaning legal research and writing in her Reply filed yesterday with
the SC.
Santiago said that her three adversaries also erred when they cited the 1947 case of
Avelino v. Cuenco.
The Avelino case is no longer ruling case law, because it has been superseded by
the 1993 case of Guingona v. Gonzales. The later case supersedes the earlier
case, she said.
Santiago said her three opponents overlooked a new proven in
the Constitution expanding the judicial power of the Supreme Court.