‘Insider trading’ at SC?
Is Marcos-vintage lawyer Estelito Mendoza engaged in some kind of “insider trading” at the Supreme Court? That’s how it looks like, given his phenomenal success whenever he intervenes in that Court—even to the extent of having its “final decisions” set aside and/or reversed in the manner he wants.
In quite a number of instances, Mendoza’s egregious “letter-writing” to that Court has produced astonishing—nay, shocking—results. And those are being done in guarded secrecy as the adverse parties are seldom, if at all, furnished copies thereof, not to mention that those gambits are nowhere sanctioned by any rule of judicial practice and procedure. In fact, such overtures are precisely deemed highly unethical and tottering on the precipice of contempt! That alone should suffice to treat those “letters” as no more than scraps of paper, if fairness and due process were to be raised to a new-fangled level of desirability.
But the weirdest part is, the substance of those “letters” often have very little to do with the merits of the cases, but a whole lot to do with “internal matters” supposedly “confidential” and known only to the justices and some “insiders.” Given their most exalted positions, it is generally believed though that the justices themselves would never stoop that low. Most likely, Mendoza’s sources might have come from the staff or other employees of the Supreme Court who, for some mysterious reasons, have acquired the obnoxious habit of “feeding” him such secret or “classified info” to which ordinary mortals have absolutely no free access.
To illustrate how surreal it is, the rest of the law practitioners in this country have become used to receiving only one-page notices containing that all-too-familiar (almost formulaic) one-paragraph dispositions of their motions for reconsideration signed by just the Supreme Court’s clerk of court. They all accept such mantras in good faith and at face-value, and take the supposedly final verdicts (“with a warning that no further motions or pleadings will be entertained”—and under pain of contempt!) on the chin. That’s how sacrosanct all issuances of the Supreme Court are being regarded. Case closed, game over (except the clients’ gnashing of their teeth and bootless crying to deaf heaven)!
But, alack and alas, it seems Mendoza, and also notably some retired Supreme Court justices who are back in practice, also get to know why and how such resolutions have come about and are virtually flashed the green light to segue into filing a second, third or, perhaps, fourth motion for reconsideration—nay, even just a “letter”—without fear of being cited for contempt. If that is not “insider trading,” what is it?
We submit that a little house-cleaning in the Supreme Court is called for. Chief Justice Renato Corona has enunciated: “Under my watch, right will always find a sanctuary and wrong will never find a refuge.”
—STEPHEN L. MONSANTO,
Monsanto Law Office,
Loyola Heights, Quezon City,
