THE Supreme Court (SC) has justified its decision last week allowing President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice by warning of worse consequences had they ruled otherwise.
The top judicial position will be vacated by Chief Justice Reynato Puno on May 17 upon reaching the mandatory age retirement of 70.
Six nominees are vying for Puno’s post: Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio and Associate Justices Renato Puno, Conchita Carpio-Morales, Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Arturo Brion, and Sandiganbayan justice Edilberto Sandoval.
Of the six, Carpio and Corona are said to be neck-and-neck in the running, with Carpio being the most senior among the other magistrates and backed by civil society, and Corona touted as Palace favorite.
Court spokesman Jose Midas Marquez told reporters over the weekend that if the SC vested the authority to appoint the next chief justice to the next president, the candidates for the top executive position might use it as a bargaining chip in appointing nominees for the chief justice post.
Marquez said this scenario would bring in bigger problems, considering that the next president and the incoming chief justice he or she would appoint would be beholden to one another and undermine the independence of the court.
“Don’t you think a Chief Justice appointed by an incoming president or by a new president who later may be subject of electoral protest will be a bigger problem?” he said.
“Who will be more independent – the chief justice appointed by a new president subject of electoral protest, or the chief justice who was appointed by the previous president who does not have any electoral protest against her?” he added.
He said that contrary to what some critics are saying, the people can expect an Arroyo-appointed chief justice to be more independent as he or she performs a crucial role after the May 10 elections.
Marquez said trouble could arise if an acting chief justice were named after Puno’s retirement and the proclamation of the winning president were challenged before the SC, sitting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET).
Such situation, he added, is likely to happen rather than the much-speculated failure of elections feared by critics of the latest SC ruling granting Arroyo the power to appoint Puno’s successor during the election period.
Critics claimed that an election failure may lead to the incumbent President holding on to power beyond June 30 as they predicted the SC, headed by a chief justice purportedly beholden to her, will rule in favor of her becoming a “holdover president” in case this happens.
But all these concerns, according to Marquez, are “pure speculation.”
Unlike the feared failure of elections, Marquez said the filing of an electoral protest against the proclaimed winner in the May presidential elections “is something that can very well happen.”
“It’s very easy to file an electoral protest than to have a failure of elections. What if there’s a new president and that president appoints a new chief justice and then a day later an electoral protest is filed (with the PET)? How do you expect this newly appointed chief justice to decide against the one who just appointed him?” the court official asked.
Marquez furthered that he personally believes it would be better if “the incumbent President appoints the chief justice so that when that president leaves we will have a new president whose chief justice is not beholden to him.”
Urged to back off
Fisherfolk alliance Pambansang Lakas ng Kilusang Mamamalakaya ng Pilipinas (Pamalakaya) on Sunday joined the growing opposition to the High Court decision allowing President Arroyo to pick the next chief justice despite the constitutional ban on midnight appointments.
The group said Arroyo should leave the naming of the successor of Chief Justice Reynato Puno to the next president. Puno is set to retire on May 17.
“The national interest and the collective will of 94 million Filipinos and the 1987 Constitution strongly mandate the GMA republic to refrain from appointing the next SC chief justice. It is time for Arroyo to retreat, say goodbye and tell her would be successor that the ball is now in his or her court to name the next chief justice. This is easy as ABC,” Pamalakaya national chair Fernando Hicap said in a statement.
Hicap said the decision is “tailor made” to accommodate the reported plan of Malacanang to extend the term of Arroyo beyond June 30 through declaration of failure of elections, the possible declaration of Martial Law or any Palace edict that would keep Arroyo to stay in power.
“The nine SC (Supreme Court) justices who voted in favor of Arroyo's appointing power despite the clear constitutional ban should now realize the follies and grave mistakes the fatal legal error and political blunder they done that caused their across-the-nation isolation from the people,” he said.
Pamalakaya described the SC ruling as “a major legal disaster and highly revolting” while calling on the justices to reverse the decision and “back off from entertaining any Palace indecent proposal or repel political-military pressures from GMA and the pro-GMA clique in the military.”
Rumors are rife that a military operation plan called “August Moon” supposedly to extend the term of Arroyo by mobilizing her loyal generals but the military quickly dismissed the speculations.
Extend Puno’s term
The fisherfolks’ group meanwhile presented two options to resolve the issue:
* extend the term of retiring Chief Justice Puno until June 30 and allow the next president to choose his successor from the shortlist coming from the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC).
* if Puno pursues retirement on May 17, Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio should be the Acting Chief Justice from May 18 to June 30 or until the next president can choose among the shortlisted nominees.
Puno on March 18 designated Carpio as Acting Chief Justice after he decided to go on a “wellness and sabbatical leave” in Rome until the end of the Holy Week on April 4.
The group advised Arroyo to do the “most lawful, sensible, and objective action that suits to the national interest and collective will of the people.”
“The trouble with Mrs. Arroyo is her super obsession to stay in power beyond June 30, 2010 and hell bent in appointing a Chief Justice that will follow the doctrine of Malacanang,” Pamalakaya said.
It also warned the next chief justice appointed by Arroyo will suffer credibility crisis and would be perceived “as puppet of a President with cruel intentions and sinister agenda against the people.”
“Arroyo's appointment or anything that suggests association with GMA is a kiss of death. The next SC Chief Justice who will be appointed by Mrs. Arroyo and who will accept the appointment of a criminal and brutal presidency will be condemned by the people and history,” added Pamalakaya.
Aquino softens stand
Liberal Party standard bearer Senator Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III said he is obliged to follow the Constitution and recognize the appointed chief justice if he wins.
He, however, insists that there is check and balance between the branches of government regarding the chief justice appointment.
Aquino will support efforts to file a motion of reconsideration on the SC decision allowing President Arroyo to appoint Puno's successor.
But the presidential aspirant is not hopeful that the SC will reverse its ruling, saying that based on history, the high tribunal has never overturned itself.
“In case we question the constitutionality of this decision, who will judge? It's the same people. Who will participate if they have delicadeza? Those who did not participate? Those who participated are minorities to the SC. We are like in a deadlock situation,” he said.
Aquino earlier said that he will not recognize any chief justice appointment that will be made by the Arroyo administration.
While Aquino himself cannot directly file the motion for reconsideration because he is not an intervener on the case, he has declared that he will join protest marches against the decision.
“We hope that we don't send conflict. I have promised four provinces that I will appear. I hope they understand if I join the protest movement.”
Aquino has yet to study the SC ruling, but said that the power of check and balance among the executive, legislative, and judicial branches will be imposed if he deems that the decision was not made under due legal principles.
The appointed chief justice could be impeached under his administration if he finds the appointment to be illegal, according to Aquino.
“The legislature has the power of impeachment if they feel there are grounds to impeach and impeachable constitutional body. That is open to any president... Therefore we will have to restudy the matter, study our options. At this point in time Congress has yet to be elected.”
Aquino maintains that Article VII, Section 15 of the Constitution pertains to the ban in appointments of all branches of the government, and not just the executive unless it concerns public security.
SC’s credibility
In Malacañang, Deputy Presidential Spokesman Gary Olivar believed that the protest actions against the SC would eventually subside, banking on the maturity of the Filipinos and their respect for the rule of law.
Olivar, in an interview by Radyo ng Bayan, said they are not concerned about those opposing or criticizing the ruling, but they are saddened that it might affect the credibility of the High Court and other constitutional bodies.
“Hindi tayo natatakot sa mga pagkilos na ganito, nalulungkot tayo, pero naniniwala tayo na very mature na by now ang ating mga kababayan at they see through this latest potential adventurism,” he said.
He also expressed confidence such protest actions would not escalate, to the point that protesters would literally pour their blood on the streets similar to what the demonstrators did in Bangkok where they donated their blood, which they poured on the house of Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajivaas as they called for the conduct of an election.
According to the Palace official, protesters should instead donate their blood to the bloodbank or the Philippine Red Cross to put it to better use.
Olivar dismissed it would result to another people power revolution that would involve or be supported by the military or the police.
He said the members of the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police are professionals who would not follow “illegal orders” and would instead remain loyal to the "rule of law" and the "Chain of Command.”
“Maasahan natin na walang mangyayaring mga ganung klaseng, kung anuman ang binabalak ng mga ito na para isulong ang kanilang iniisip na katwiran o katotohanan, kung sila ay gagawa ng mga hakbang na hindi alinsunod sa batas o hindi alinsunod sa kaayusan, walang mangyayari sa kanila.”
Olivar chided the opposition and administration critics whom he accused of pushing for their own version of the truth and justice by opposing and criticizing decisions that are not favorable to them like the latest ruling over the appointment of next chief justice. (Virgil Lopez/Angela Casauay/JCV/JMR/Sunnex)