Protests set vs SC ruling on 'midnight Chief Justice'
Palace belies talk of poll failure, martial law
MANILA, Philippines (1st UPDATE) - Various groups are expected to hold a protest on Friday against the Supreme Court’s decision allowing the appointment of a "midnight Chief Justice" by President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
Lawyers' organizations and party-list group Akbayan are set to march to the Supreme Court Friday morning to condemn the ruling issued on Wednesday. (Read: SC: President can appoint new chief justice)
A forum on the Supreme Court's controversial decision will be held at the UP College of Law on Friday from 3 to 5 pm. UP College of Law Dean Marvic Leonen and former Dean Raul Pangalangan are expected to discuss the implications of the ruling.
After the forum, a protest march calling for defense of judicial independence will be held around the UP Oval, followed by candle lighting at 6:30 pm. Those who will join have been asked to wear black.
The Philippine Bar Association (PBA) will file before April a motion for reconsideration on the controversial decision.
Speaking to ANC's Headstart on Thursday, former Ombudsman and PBA President Simeon Marcelo said a previous Supreme Court decision had stated that the chief justice post is covered by the constitutional ban on appointments during the election period.
He also questioned the Supreme Court's failure to hold oral arguments and invite "friends of the court" or the amicus curae to give their opinions on the case. (Read: Ex-Ombudsman Marcelo cites dangers in SC decision)
"There seems to be an undue haste in resolving the case," Marcelo said. "That's what I was very worried about even before the decision came out."
Asked what the chances of getting the ruling reversed are, Marcelo said he's not optimistic. "Sabi ko nga, pagkatapos natin mafile yung motion for reconsideration (MR), araw-araw tayo magdadasal and hope that they are enlightened."
Supreme Court spokesperson Midas Marquez said anyone can file a motion for reconsideration on the issue.
Grand plan to extend PGMA's stay in power?
The court's decision has been widely criticized in legal circles.
Critics of the president claimed the ruling is part of a "grand plan" to extend President Arroyo's stay in office.
They said that in the event of even a partial failure of elections and the president wins a seat in Congress and is installed as House Speaker, she may be declared as acting president.
Senate minority leader Aquilino Pimentel said on Thursday the Supreme Court's decision is a "big blow against the rule of law" and "another blight on the armour of the Supreme Court as an institution."
"I think the Supreme Court misread the constitutional provision and twisted its rationale to provide justification," Pimentel said.
Palace belies talk of poll failure, martial law
Malacañang, meanwhile, hit back at those criticizing the Supreme Court's decision allowing President Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice despite the ban on midnight appointments.
Deputy presidential spokesman Gary Olivar on Thursday said critics are trying to scare the public with talks of election failure and even martial law.
Presidential spokesman Ricardo Saludo said Malacañang is confident the Supreme Court will not reverse its decision once a motion for reconsideration is filed.
Saludo also said questions on the independence of justices should be directed at the justices themselves, and not the Palace.
"If you are challenging the independence of justices, why not put the question to them, not to the Palace," he said.
Final decision is with JBC, not SC
Through a vote of 9 of the 15 Supreme Court justices, the high court on Wednesday ruled that the judiciary is not covered by the ban on appointments before a national election, and Mrs. Arroyo can appoint the new chief justice before she steps down. (Read the SC decision as well as concurring, separate concurring and dissenting opinions.)
The high court also directed the JBC, to submit its shortlist of nominees for chief justice to President Arroyo on or before May 17.
Retired Supreme Court Justice Vicente Mendoza, however, believes the final decision still rests on the JBC.
He said that being an independent body, the JBC can still opt not to give its shortlist of nominees to the incumbent president.
JBC urged not to be SC's rubber stamp
Senator Francis Pangilinan, who served as JBC Senate representative from 2001 to 2008, urged the JBC not to be a "rubber stamp of the Supreme Court" and "file a motion for reconsideration on the SC ruling."
"The JBC, as a collegial body, should vote on whether or not it agrees with the SC decision. And if it has the vote favoring opposition to the ruling, it should file a motion for reconsideration with the SC. The JBC, while under the supervision of the Supreme Court, is not under its control when it comes to its powers to screen nominees and submit the list of nominees to Malacañang," Pangilinan said.
"The JBC is not and never should be a rubber stamp of the Supreme Court. It should vote on the issue and make its stand known to the public," he added.
For his part, University of the East's Dean Amado Valdez agreed with associate justices Antonio Nachura and Presbitero Velasco's argument that the decision is still premature.
"Dapat hindi muna magdesisyon dahil wala pa namang bakante," Valdez said.
He added it is expected that some quarters will associate the decision with the fact that majority of the justices are Arroyo appointees.
Corona likely to be Chief Justice?
Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) member Senator Francis Escudero said associate justices Antonio Carpio and Conchita Carpio-Morales must declare if they still want to be included in the list of nominees to the chief justice post.
The two justices initially agreed to be nominated on the condition that it won't be President Arroyo but the next president who would appoint the next chief justice.
Escudero said that if Carpio and Carpio-Morales reject their nominations, associate justice Renato Corona will be the most senior justice in the Supreme Court.
Before Arroyo appointed him to the Supreme Court, Corona served her in the executive department as presidential spokesman, chief presidential legal counsel, acting executive secretary, and presidential chief of staff.
By tradition, the most senior justice is appointed to the top post in the judiciary.
But Escudero was quick to point out that all the nominees are qualified to be the next chief justice.
The senator also said that after the Supreme Court allowed President Arroyo to appoint the next chief justice, the JBC has no choice but to submit a shortlist of nominees.
Arroyo Supreme Court is complete
With the Supreme Court's decision allowing President Arroyo to name the next chief justice, magistrates of the high court will all now be appointees of the chief executive. (Read: Ruling will allow Arroyo 2 more appointments to SC)
This is once the JBC submits its list of nominees and the president chooses the successor of Chief Justice Puno, who will retire on May 17.
This scenario worried the Makati Business Club. Its executive director Alberto Lim said this could be bad for business because it may create fears of political uncertainty.
Senator Pangilinan said naming the next chief justice is crucial for Arroyo because of the cases the court has to decide upon after the May 10 elections.
This includes the issue on who should sit as acting president in case of a failure of elections.
"Panalo dito si PGMA dahil may pagkakataon siya na ang tao niya na naman ang lalagay niya sa Korte Suprema. This is quite disturbing to say the least," Pangilinan said.
Marcelo said the president stands to benefit even in the event of a partial failure of elections. If Mrs. Arroyo wins the congressional race in the second district of Pampanga, and is elected House Speaker, she may be declared acting president.
Reports have it Malacañang is favoring Corona as the next chief justice.
Marcelo believes this possibility, and the appointment of General Delfin Bangit as armed forces chief, are just tools to extend the president's term.
Both Bangit and Corona are close to the president.
"The consequences are far reaching...Well, I'm hoping and praying that the JBC will be more independent than the SC," Marcelo said.
He also said the JBC can still choose not to promptly submit to the president a list of nominees to the top post of the high court. -- reports from ABS-CBN News Channel; Timi Nubla and RG Cruz, ABS-CBN News
Printer-friendly version
Send to friend
Share your views
sa mga taong subrang lawak ang imagination
basahin nyo kaya itong link na ito para naman mababawasan ang pagka over lawak ng imagination nyo. sa subra lawak ng imagination nyo hindi nyo na na isip kung anu mabuti sa para sa bansa natin ang mga political affiliation nyo na lang ang pina pa iral nyo. ito basahin nyo:
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/nation/view/20100321-260037/Be...
@Adoremus
Thanks man.
I can't bring myself to Gibo's side, I like his stance/mantle but he is standing on the wrong ground. Next election perhaps as an independent or I wish to see him establish himself in a different party who has a cleaner slate. I think we all want the same, we just can't agree in how to get there. Too many party's lead by agenda which will make us voters the minority at the end, as always. God bless to you too!
rockymickeyquick
rockymickeyquick – Hindi lang naman si C. Monsod ang nadismaya, majority of Filipinos are.
Article VII, Section 15 of 1987 Philippine Constitution, states that: “Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety”.
It is crystal-clear that the above-mentioned Article does not mention “Except for Judiciary”, so in essence and for all intents and purposes, this provision covers all positions that are executive in nature, including the Judiciary, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety
Here is an Article posted from the Filipino Voices.
This is how things stood on last Wednesday’s Supreme Court Ruling that outgoing President Arroyo can appoint a Chief Justice In-Waiting.
1. Section 15 Article VII of the 1987 Constitution still prohibits the incumbent president from making appointments two months before an election and until his or term expires.
2. This year, the election ban started on March 10 and will last until the end of President Arroyo’s term on June 30.
3. Put in simpler words, under the 1987 Constitution, an outgoing president is barred from making appointments two months before an election and until the end of his or her term.
4. In the case of Mrs. Arroyo, she cannot issue midnight appointments from March 10 to June 30.
Ponder, too, these antecedents:
During the time of President Fidel V. Ramos the justices disallowed FVR from making appointments during an election period.
Former Constitutional Commission member and Ateneo de Manila Law Scool dean emeritus Father Joaquin Bernas had said that even without a formal petition filed before it, the Supreme Court (SC) on its own could put an end to the raging controversy surrounding President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s possible naming of a chief justice during the period covered by the election appointment ban.
Bernas told a forum organized by the watchdog group Supreme Court Appointments Watch (SCAW) that the SC, motu propio or on its own accord, could rule on the constitutionality of Arroyo’s selection of a replacement for Chief Justice (CJ) Reynato Puno.
CJ, the only remaining non-Arroyo appointee in the Court, prudently chose not to participate in the deliberations today as he is also chair of the Judicial and Bar Council.
If Arroyo forces the issue and appoints the next chief justice, he said the SC could strike it down without waiting for a party to lodge a petition.
Father Bernas cited the case involving the disputed appointments of judges Mateo Valenzuela and Placido Vallarta to the Regional Trial Court (RTC) in May 1998.
He stressed how the SC en banc went ahead on its own and invalidated the judges’ appointments since these were well within the period covered by the election appointment ban.
In the event the JBC does not submit a list and President Arroyo appoints a chief justice during the period of the appointment ban, Bernas said this would trigger a constitutional crisis as this would be a blatant violation of the Constitution.
The High Court said:
The appointment of the next Chief Justice by the incumbent President is preferable to having the Associate Justice who is first in precedence take over. Under the Constitution, the heads of the Legislative and Executive Departments are popularly elected, and whoever are elected and proclaimed at once become the leaders of their respective Departments. However, the lack of any appointed occupant of the office of Chief Justice harms the independence of the Judiciary, because the Chief Justice is the head of the entire Judiciary. The Chief Justice performs functions absolutely significant to the life of the nation. With the entire Supreme Court being the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, the Chief Justice is the Chairman of the Tribunal. There being no obstacle to the appointment of the next Chief Justice, aside from its being mandatory for the incumbent President to make within the 90-day period from May 17, 2010, there is no justification to insist that the successor of Chief Justice Puno be appointed by the next President.
Anticipating the decision, Father Joaquin Bernas opined that the worst-case scenario is widespread protest in response to Arroyo’s midnight appointment. He even hinted that he himself would join the protest.
The constitutionalist went on to warn that a justice who accepts an appointment under these circumstances would be an “accessory to the crime” since the appointment would constitute a “culpable violation of the Constitution,” and this means the new chief justice may be impeached.
But Bernas said it is possible to implement the two contradictory provisions in the Constitution on the election appointment ban and the need to fill the vacancy in the Supreme Court within 90 days from time CJ Puno retires on May 17.
The solution is to prevent President Arroyo from naming the next chief justice and to just let the next president make the appointment.
He noted that the next chief executive would still have 45 days left or until August 15 to choose the next chief justice from the time he or she assumes office on June 30, 2010.
Seems quite reasonable and easy to do, right?
But not if you consider how the emerging mindset of Arroyo is, as mirrored from her lapdogs:
1. She will do what is expedient.
2. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo will name a CJ In-Waiting even though the results of the elections are expected a couple of days after May 10,
3. She will ignore that fact that the Philippines would already have a President-elect!!!
The ignoble premise?
That she cannot ‘neglect’ her sworn duty not to leave a vacancy in the Supreme Court unfilled. Hogwash many would say. But for someone facing the likelihood of criminal charges after June 30, GMA will play her trump card and make sure that the highest court of the land is populated by her appointees.
So there you are.
Kapal...
Ang kakapal naman ng mga mukha ninyo... Lantaran kayo magpakita ng dumi ninyo. Kung manloloko kayo ng kapwa pinoy, wag naman lantaran. ANG KAKAPAL NIYO...
NO MORE TRUST LEFT FOR GLORIA MACAPAGAL ARROYO.....
-CHEATING IN 2004 ELECTIONS.ASKING FORGIVENESS FROM THE FILIPINO PEOPLE OF WHAT SHE DID IN FRONT OF THE TV BROADCASTED NATIONWIDE.
-SEVERAL TIMES PROMISED NOT TO RUN FOR REELECTION.
-SEVERAL CORRUPTION CASES AMONG OTHER THINGS.
-APPOINTED TO TOP MILITARY POSTS GENERALS CLOSED TO ARROYO.
-AND NOW SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.
..ANG MANINIWALA LANG KAY GMA AY ANG MGA TAONG NAGTATANGATANGAHAN.
cacophony of misguided voices
People are up in arms against the ruling of the SCORP paving the way for the President to apppoint a replacement of chameleon, CJ Reynato Puno. It is sad and regrettable that they look at the decision as personal and not institutional.
http://jcc34.wordpress.com/
Judicial is another CORRUPT BRANCH OF GOVERMENT
FILIPINO BE VIGILANT AGAINST THIS FAKE,CORRUPT GLORIA(HELL) MACAPAL ARROVO THEY NEED TO GO TO BABOYAN ISLAND THEY DON'T DESERVED TO BE IN MALACANANG..
Hukom at Bitay
Who can the nation trust now when we have a corrupted judiciary? A judiciary that acts as one of the tentacles of this corrupt and fake president. Poor Pinoy seems last recourse is to seek extra judicial. People power is brewing and reckoning for true justice shocks and scares Pinoy. For chaos can erupts when the nation turns to a punisher sword. Hukom at Bitay in forging and purging for true justice.
Philippine Legal Dictionary
Client translated as "Killyente"
Litigants means "Litogantis"
Affidavit is "Kabitkapit"
Clerk of Court is "Collect of Court"
Magistrate is "Masahestrado"
Ex-parte is "parte-parte"
Pro bono is "puro bonus"
Gratis is "Gatas"
Fiscal is Fixcal
Prosecutor is "Purokutong"
Atty at law is "Atty outlaw"
at marami pang birong tutuo...
"Chingador says: Has anybody
"Chingador says:
Has anybody read the history of the French Revolution?
Has anybody read the history of the French Revolution? I would recommend it as a good reading relevant to the current political situation in PI."
I agree. The only solution to our malaise situation is to rise against the "Arrovo pusakals".
Panahon na upang kalusin ang mga pusakal ng bayan.