Arroyo sought to protect herself
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is a good example of the saying that the best-laid plans of men can go awry. From the appointments to the courts she made during her nearly a decade in power, it would seem that she had prepared for that time she would need all the legal protection from any suit filed against her, especially when she is no longer in power. I am not saying that it is a fact, but from a jaundiced point of view, it appears that the people she placed in key positions during her presidency were meant to serve that purpose—to protect her during her time of need. Seemingly, she carefully packed the three most important judicial institutions with people she could count on for help, if and when the need arises.
First, there is the Office of the Ombudsman, the agency that investigates, files charges and prosecutes public officials suspected of wrongdoing. GMA appointed then Justice Secretary Merceditas Gutierrez, a classmate and close friend of her husband Mike, as ombudsman in December 2005. The suspicious say that the appointment was meant to ensure that if any cases were to be filed with this institution, her appointee would be there to help. And we all know what happened: Gutierrez sat on graft cases involving GMA’s kith and kin, and the case dossiers gathered dust in the ombudsman’s office. True, that office endorsed cases for prosecution before the Sandiganbayan, but they involved mostly the small fry, not the big fish.
Second, there is the Sandiganbayan. GMA likewise loaded it with “friendly” appointees. A prominent case is the decision of the Second Division—then composed of Presiding Justice Edilberto Sandoval (who has since retired), Justice Teresita V. Diaz-Baldos and Justice Samuel R. Martirez—which, early this year, accepted the plea bargain of former AFP comptroller Carlos Garcia.
And third, there is the Supreme Court, which some critics call the “Arroyo Court.” Twelve of the 15 justices were all GMA appointees, including the present chief justice.
Aside from Chief Justice Renato Corona, they are Associate Justices Teresita Leonardo-De Castro, Roberto Abad, Presbitero Velasco, Arturo Brion, Martin Villarama, Diosdado Peralta, Lucas Bersamin, Jose Perez, Antonio Carpio, Jose Mendoza and Mariano del Castillo.
In the recent voting on the temporary restraining order (TRO) on the enforcement of the Department of Justice watch-list order (WLO) against GMA, two GMA appointees (Carpio and Mendoza) joined the three dissenters appointed by President Aquino. Two others (Del Castillo and De Castro) were not present during the voting. The eight others (derisively called by critics “the Arroyo 8”) all voted for the issuance of the TRO and allowed GMA to leave.
The arguments of the dissenters in this case were very simple: one, there was no urgency in the issuance of the TRO; and two, the administration should have been allowed to present its arguments within days. But the “Arroyo 8” still called the vote, knowing they already had the numbers.
You will recall the controversy that attended the appointment of Corona as chief justice to replace Reynato Puno after the latter retired in 2010. There were many legal luminaries who said that GMA should not appoint the next chief justice and that this should be left to the incoming president. But GMA insisted on appointing Corona.
Corona was for a long time the chief of staff and spokesman of GMA—first, when she was still senator from 1998 to 2001; and later, when she assumed the presidency after Edsa II, Corona became her first chief of staff. They go back a long way indeed.
These are but a few facts that would seem to show that GMA prepared for her future. She created her own web of protection during her decade-long reign as president.
Now we can begin to understand why President Aquino was so gung-ho over impeaching Gutierrez and appointing a new Sandiganbayan presiding justice. He knew that GMA’s web of legal protection had to be dismantled to give his administration a chance at putting the malefactors during GMA’s term behind bars.
* * *
While the government has been criticized as being “too fast” in filing the electoral sabotage case and in issuing a warrant for GMA’s arrest, it is also being criticized as being “too slow” in the case of the Maguindanao massacre in which 57 persons, including 32 media workers, were mercilessly mowed down by the private army of the Ampatuan clan. It has been two years after the massacre, but the trial of the accused is moving at a snail’s pace.
On the second anniversary of the massacre, Amnesty International deplored the “very slow wheels of justice” in the Philippines. At the rate the trial is going, it would take “55,000 years” before the case is completed, according to an estimate of prosecution lawyer Harry Roque. Why? Roque explained it this way: There are 196 defendants, each of whom are facing 57 cases. It takes about five years to try a single case in the Philippines. “So that’s about 55,000 years,” Roque said.
He proposed that the number of defendants be trimmed and focus be directed on those who were primarily responsible for the planning and killing of the victims. The other defendants can be charged with lesser offenses, Roque said.
“Not everyone responsible was charged with war crimes after World War II,” Roque added. “Let’s just focus on the primary accused… the Ampatuan family and those who actually pulled the triggers.”
* * *
KAPIHAN NOTES: Guests at the Kapihan sa Manila at the Diamond Hotel next Monday will be Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, Comelec Chair Sixto Brillantes and Sen. Kiko Pangilinan.
