THE Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (Fasap) on Monday asked the Supreme Court (SC) to junk its resolution recalling its final decision that declared as illegal the decision of the country’s flag carrier, Philippine Airlines (PAL), to dismiss its 1,400 cabin crew.

In its 10-page motion for reconsideration, Fasap, through lawyer Santiago A.R. Kapunan, said the court’s recall of its September 7, 2011, resolution had no constitutional or legal basis and, thus, must be stricken.  The High Court, in its September 7 decision, denied with finality the second motion for reconsideration filed by PAL for lack of merit.

But on October 4, the full court (en banc) issued a resolution, taking cognizance of the letters and motion filed by PAL’s counsel Estelito Mendoza asking the court to negate its September 7 resolution. 

The SC also decided to elevate the case before the full court for action to avoid further confusion.

Court Administrator and Spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the court agreed with Mendoza, justice secretary of the Marcos government, that the issuance of the September 7 resolution by the Second Division was in violation of the SC Internal Rules.

But Fasap said there is nothing in the Constitution or in any law that grants the SC the authority to recall a final and executory judgment, such as the one on September 7.

“The Supreme Court may have well exceeded its administrative authority in this case when it proceeded to recall an immutable final judgment rendered in the proper proceedings without any showing that the same is void, and notwithstanding that the substantive rights of so many have already vested,” the group said.

Fasap noted that the authority to recall a final and executory judgment is simply not among the judicial and administrative powers vested on the SC.

“More to the point, even a second motion for reconsideration can only be entertained in the higher interest of justice, that is, when the assailed decision is not only legally erroneous, but is likewise patently unjust and potentially capable of causing unwarranted and irremediable injury or damage to the parties,”  Fasap said.

In its July 22, 2008, decision, the SC granted Fasap’s petition seeking to declare the dismissal of its 1,400 members illegal. It denied PAL’s first motion for reconsideration on October 2, 2009.

But the SC modified part of the ruling—instead of ordering PAL to immediately reinstate the cabin crew or pay their back wages and separation pay—it threw the case back to the labor arbiter “solely for the purpose of computing the exact amount of the award” to be given to the dismissed employees.