A petition has been filed before the Supreme Court (SC) by former solicitor general Frank Chavez challenging the composition of the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).
In a 52-page petition, Chavez said the constitution only allows a single seat for a member of congress in the collegial body and not for two voting representatives from the two houses of Congress.
Instead of having only one member from Congress, the current composition of the JBC has two members, Sen. Francis Escudero and Iloilo Rep. Tupas.
The JBC, which screens nominees to positions in the judiciary, has been conducting proceedings to field a replacement for ousted Chief Justice (CJ) Renato Corona.
Two members of the JBC, acting CJ Antonio Carpio and Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, have abstained from participating in the selection as they were themselves nominees to the post.
Both formally accepted their nomination yesterday.
“(T)here is no such shortcoming in the way the provision was worded. The provision is crystal clear.” Chavez said, asking the high court to interpret  Section 8, PAr. (1), Article VIII of the Philippine Constitution that provides that the composition of the JBC includes “a representative of the congress.”
The provision of the constitution, Chaves said, “is clear that the JBC shall have only one representative from Congress.”
During the early years after the Constitution was enacted and took effect, the JBC was strictly composed of only seven members.
At the time of its enactment until the year 1994, only one representative of Congress sat as a member of the council. What Congress did at that time, in order to give a chance to chosen members of both houses of Congress to sit as members of the JBC, was to provide alternative representation, Chavez explained.
In 1994, the composition of the JBC was suddenly changed and instead of having only seven there were eight with each member of the house giving one half vote. This practice was followed until 2001.
The framers of the Constitution clearly envisioned , contemplated and decided on a JBC composed of only seven members, Chavez claimed, adding that “the JBC cannot conduct valid proceedings as its composition is illegal and unconstitutional.”
He warned that  the “pervasive practice of  a patently unconstitutional act may ripen into an indefeasible peremptory norm.”
“There can be no question that this is in utter and blatant violation of the Constitution.” Chavez said.                             Benjamin B. Pulta