Why it was SC that disrespected Executive
Amando Doronila, in his Dec. 12 commentary titled “The President’s bullying of the Supreme Court,” insists that President Aquino is waging a “hate campaign” and “bullying assaults” against Chief Justice Renato Corona and the high tribunal.
I don’t see any “hate campaign” nor “bullying tactics” by P-Noy. The key issue here, as I see it, is the accountability of public officials. Aquino wants former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to be made accountable for serious misdeeds during her nine-and-a-half years in office. These include plunder, electoral fraud and human rights violations. If Doronila thinks these are flimsy allegations without any basis at all, then perhaps he would be correct in saying that there is a “hate campaign” against Corona.
But plunder, electoral fraud and murder and enforced disappearance are not crimes that may be conveniently swept under the rug. Where crime has been committed, then there must be punishment. And what Aquino is doing is to make Arroyo accountable before a court of law, and not allow her to avoid prosecution.
Corona has been in the crosshairs of Malacañang precisely because his actions are perceived to be directed at making Arroyo escape prosecution. The temporary restraining order (TRO) he and seven other members of the Supreme Court issued last Nov. 15 was done without the benefit of hearing the government side, particularly the Department of Justice. In fact, it is the Supreme Court that disrespected the Executive in this particular case, not the other way around.
And has Doronila forgotten that the Constitution is very clear against “midnight appointments”? Corona was appointed to the lofty position after the May 2010 elections, thus making it as clear as day that he is indeed a “midnight appointee” of Arroyo.
Corona’s “midnight appointment,” plus the fact that his entire public career in the past decade or so was intimately linked to Arroyo—he was her chief of staff when she was vice president, and her chief of staff, chief legal counsel and acting executive secretary when she was president—has made his objectivity and impartiality highly suspect.
And then, of course, as Sen. Franklin Drilon has pointed out, the decisions he made as associate justice and chief justice have all been in favor of Arroyo.
Doronila says that P-Noy “is deploying the full weight of (presidential) powers to crush Corona and the entire court and to weaken its independence” and mobilizing a “hysterical lynch mob” in the streets against Corona and the Supreme Court.
The independence of the Judiciary as an institution should be respected, but when judges and justices are themselves wanting in integrity and lacking in objectivity and fairness, it is only proper that taxpayers take them to task and ask them to adhere to the rule of law. This is not a “hysterical lynch mob” after Corona’s neck, but the people themselves demanding accountability from him.
—JACOB SUAREZ,
