As President Duterte’s first appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Samuel R. Martires naturally drew a lot of curiosity. He is known as a career jurist—a judge of the Regional Trial Court of Agoo, La Union, 2000-2006, and associate justice of the Sandiganbayan (SBN), 2006-2017.
JBC scrutiny. However, after the media reported that he 1) acquitted then Davao City Mayor Duterte, 2) met with the President in August 2016, 3) mouthed controversial opinions, 4) was administratively charged with gross ignorance of the law, 5) will retire in less than two years on Jan. 2, 2019, and 6) was a graduate of San Beda College, friends grew “curiouser” and asked me to weigh him.
To begin with, all these bits of information were known to, scrutinized by and deliberated upon by the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), which—after interviewing him lengthily on Nov. 16, 2016—found him worthy and included him in its list of nominees.
Nonetheless, let me take up each of them. On Item 1, I looked at his decision (concurred in by Justices Francisco Villaruz and Alex Quiroz) in People vs Duterte (SBN, April 14, 2011). I agree that the case should be, as it was, dismissed outright for lack of probable cause. Mayor Duterte could not be held liable for demolishing a canal cover that caused massive flooding and that was, in the first place, built without the proper permits.
No courtesy call. On Item 2, he clarified during his JBC interview that he “did not make a courtesy call on the President.” With three other SBN justices (Quiroz, Jose Hernandez and Geraldine Econg), he went to Davao “to conduct an out of town hearing.”
On Aug. 4, they met the President, upon his invitation. The President, according to him, did not mention any case; he talked merely of his student days, his war on drugs, his recollection of Mindanao history, and his respect for the judiciary.
On Item 3, he said—during the same JBC interview—that, had he been sitting in the Supreme Court, he would have a) joined the concurring opinion of Justice Jose C. Mendoza that the burial of Ferdinand Marcos’ remains in the Libingan ng mga Bayani was “more of a political issue than a justiciable one”; b) agreed with the acquittal of former president Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, there being “no proof that she amassed ill-gotten wealth through a series of criminal acts”; but c) dissented from the grant of bail to former senator Juan Ponce Enrile because the grounds used (advanced age and fragile health) were not among those provided for in the law.
Courageous textualist. After watching his interview on YouTube, I reckon he belongs to the Analytical School of Jurisprudence that adheres faithfully to the text of laws. He firmly stuck to the courage of his conviction, despite heavy grilling by the JBC members.
On Item 4, the Supreme Court in Pangan vs Ganay (Dec. 4, 2004), far from chastising him for alleged ignorance of the law, upheld his refusal to issue a warrant of arrest, holding that judges may decline detaining the accused after the prosecution manifested “they would be moving [later] for the dismissal of the case as they would be filing a [new] case against another person.”
On Item 5, I believe he could make up for his short stint by working extra hard to help reduce the clogged dockets of the Supreme Court. Moreover, I expect him to show his independence early on because, to quote again from his JBC interview, “the Court should not be influenced by any king or president. We should only rely and make our decision pursuant to the evidence and the applicable law.”
Item 6 does not necessarily mean subservience. While the President’s closest allies are his San Beda fellows, his harshest critics, Sen. Leila de Lima and former senator Rene Saguisag, are also from that blessed Benedictine school.
At bottom, I think we should welcome Justice Martires and give him the chance to help solve what to him are the three main problems of the judiciary: “corruption… perceived interference of government officials… and trial by publicity by media.”
Next Sunday, I will talk about Mr. Duterte’s second appointee to the Supreme Court, Justice Noel G. Tijam.
Comments to chiefjusticepanganiban@hotmail.com