Editorial: Will High Court oblige?

Thursday, February 9, 2012

SUPREME Court Chief Justice Renato Corona yesterday threw the ball into his own backyard. He asked his own court not only to prevent the Senate acting as impeachment court from presenting his bank records but to stop the impeachment trial altogether and nullify the Articles of Impeachment.

Will the other members of the High Court give in to the request of their chief and stop the impeachment court from proceeding with the trial? Will they push the country into a constitutional crisis?

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

As the Supreme Court justices ponder on their next move, it is best that they consider the most obvious lesson of the impeachment trial of former president Joseph Estrada that sparked Edsa 2 in 2001. The intensity of the people’s collective rage is directly proportional to efforts to prevent the truth from coming out.

Corona may be genuinely aggrieved by the manner the impeachment court is conducting the trial and really feel that his rights are being violated. But that may not be what the people will see in his move, and that may not be how people will interpret the SC’s subsequent actions.

There’s no assurance that the issuance of a temporary restraining order against the impeachment court would be welcomed by a public already complaining of the slow pace the Corona case is being heard. It could instead spark an outrage that could threaten our democratic setup.

And it could marginalize the Supreme Court and make it impotent, dragging with it the judiciary as an institution.

A Supreme Court-issued TRO against the impeachment trial, after all, will likely go unheeded considering the temperament of the impeachment court.

Note the exchange yesterday between defense counsel Serafin Cuevas and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile when the impeachment court allowed the presentation of executives of two banks where Corona has an account as witnesses.

Cuevas protested, noting that if the bank execs would be allowed to testify, “we are worried that our petition will be rendered moot and academic. Out of respect for the SC, we beg to suspend.”

Enrile told Cuevas: "You cannot stop the process, with due respect to the Supreme Court, we are mandated to try and decide this case. The language of the Constitution is (that we) shall forthwith proceed with the trial."