Until reversed, SC rulings binding on gov’t branches
This is in reaction to a letter criticizing Fr. Ranhilio Aquino for disagreeing with Justice Secretary Leila de Lima’s decision to defy the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the Supreme Court. (Inquirer, 11/25/11)
It seems the letter-writer forgot his lessons in law in San Beda. I’m not a lawyer and did not finish college, but it does not mean I’m less educated than this self-righteous lawyer.
Let me educate you, sir, about my little knowledge with regard to the power vested on the Supreme Court by the Constitution as well as by the Civil Code of the Philippines. On page 2 of the book “Statutory Construction” which he wrote, San Beda law professor Rolando A. Suarez, quoted the Supreme Court ruling in the recent case of Songco, et al. vs. NLRC:
“When the law speaks in clear and categorical language, there is no room for interpretation or construction. There is only room for application. A plain and unambiguous statute speaks for itself, and any attempt to make it clearer is vain labor and tends only to obscurity.”
Who interprets the law?
Anyone can interpret the law including Father Aquino, of whom I am very proud although I am not connected with San Beda. or personally known to him. Lawyers, policemen, arbiters and administrative boards and agencies, government as well as private executives are involved from time to time in the interpretation of laws. Their interpretation, however, is not necessarily conclusive, nor can they bind the courts. Hence in many occasions the decisions of regulatory boards and administrative agencies have been elevated and appealed to the Supreme Court in cases where there is abuse of discretion and authority, or when there is a violation of due process or denial of substantial justice or erroneous interpretation of the law. (Mantrade Employee and Workers Union vs. Bacungan, G.R. No. 48437 9/30/86, Second Division, Feria J.)
Based on the newspaper reports I’ve read, Secretary De Lima said: The TRO is not yet final and executory because there were requirements that were not met by GMA’s camp.
This view of Secretary De Lima is invalid because Article 8 of the Civil Code says: Judicial decisions applying or interpreting the laws or the Constitution shall form a part of the legal system of the Philippines.
Supreme Court decisions, unless and until reversed en banc, shall be binding not only upon the inferior courts but also upon all branches of government.
—MOSES BARGOLA,
