Counting the costs
Chief Justice Renato Corona’s impeachment trial has yet to begin, but already the costs have begun piling up. The first thing that comes to mind is the amount being spent to get the color of the robes to be worn by the senator-judges right.
News has it that due to the complaints of senators about the “tomato-red” robes they wore when they took their oath and the bad fit that some said made them look portly, the Senate had ordered new garments of a better fit and more dignified color. From robes that gave the appearance of the senators being bathed in “tomato sauce,” the new outfits will instead be in a deeper, more dignified maroon shade, what Sen. Miriam Santiago, one of the loudest complainers, called “Cambridge,” the color preferred by European royalty.
The news stories didn’t say how much the Senate (and thus, us taxpayers) spent on its third set of sartorial wear. (The senators decided to order new robes for the Corona trial, discarding the ones ordered, but not worn, for the anticipated trial of former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.) But impeachment spokesperson Valentina Cruz was quoted as saying the cost of the new robes was “not very much.” Talk about transparency.
* * *
On the part of the embattled Chief Justice, expenses are also beginning to accumulate. He has had to put together a vaunted “defense team” that includes former Justice Serafin Cuevas whose astronomical legal fees are presumably being shouldered by Corona himself. He has also had to employ a “communications group” that I hope does not include Supreme Court spokesman Midas Marquez who himself has been accused of “lawyering” for Corona.
The House prosecution panel has also hired a private prosecutor, and I presume private investigators to look into allegations of “hidden wealth” against the Chief Justice. Neither has the other side been remiss in digging into the sources of wealth of other justices. Justice Antonio Carpio, widely believed to be the favored “successor” should Corona be forced to step down, is but the first target, with news reports about his ownership of a “posh” condominium penthouse unit in Makati.
Hidden costs likewise lurk as part of the scenario. Certainly, the reputation of the Supreme Court, even if it is only the Chief Justice who is under fire, has suffered a grievous blow. The members of the high tribunal have traditionally been considered above the fray of political infighting, and their probity and integrity taken for granted. But the bitter exchange of words between President Aquino and his spokespersons, and Corona (in an unseemly display of street language) and his spokespersons has exposed the seamy side of the political establishment. And certainly, the report that Corona secured his doctorate in civil law, with the highest Latin honors, no less, from the University of Santo Tomas, which apparently revised its rules and ignored long-established guidelines, can only further tarnish his reputation.
* * *
And while the senators in their spiffy new outfits are distracted by the impeachment proceedings, the rest of the nation pays in the sense that important, if not urgent, legislation will of necessity be shunted aside until the senators can turn their attention to them.
While the impeachment court hears the case against Corona, the legislative mill will grind to a halt, since no bills can be passed without the Senate’s concurrence.
So in a sense, we will be paying our legislators both in the House and the Senate their regular salaries and allowances without any expectation of results from them. So I guess it makes sense to request the senator-judges to hold the hearings as expeditiously as possible, with grandstanding kept to a minimum, if only to spare their main work of legislation from any further delay.
Of course, we still aren’t counting the costs to the nation after the verdict on Corona is handed down. P-Noy of course would count a “guilty” verdict against the Chief Justice as a distinct victory, and proclaim this as another step in his drive to clear all roadblocks to instituting accountability. But what will it cost the Supreme Court in terms of image, reputation, power and credibility? Will it be weakened as a consequence of the trial, or emerge with its old status renewed and rejuvenated?
* * *
Counting the costs should also include taking into account the costs to the private sector.
How many person-hours will be lost by private offices, business establishments, schools and even homes while we are all riveted by the televised (I presume) trial? Remember how even parties had to be cut short or started late at night because everybody was busy following Erap’s impeachment trial? What impact will the proceedings have on our overall productivity?
And of course there’s the expense to be shouldered by broadcast networks covering the trial. Not only would they be spending on equipment and communications technology, they would also need to forego advertising revenue during the particularly heated portions of the trial, cutting into variety shows or TV dramas to bring the events “live” to a national audience.
There is also a plus side to all these expenses, an ROI, if you will. And that will be the entertainment value of another impeachment trial, as we sit back and get an instant legal education while watching the prosecutors, the senators, and the lawyers of the Chief Justice, debate fine points of law and legality—even as all kinds of wits, comedians, bloggers and tweeters make fun of the proceedings. It all makes for a great show, an exciting diversion from the humdrum events of our drab lives.
Indeed, it’s more fun in the Philippines. Even our political circuses are far from boring.
