More ‘terms of endearment’

Anent the Inquirer’s story re “Terms of endearment” in the ongoing impeachment trial (Inquirer, 1/26/12), allow me to contribute my list of judicial terms. Take note that I have defined these terms and phrases in the context of the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona:

Court of public opinion—In contrast to the court of law, this phrase refers to the general public, whose opinions and sentiments are regarded as verdicts on certain issues. Public opinion, on the one hand, refers to the different voices—individual and collective, institutional and community, public and private—all flowing into a single stream.

Trial by publicity—This refers to the charge of the defense that the prosecution has been making unauthorized public disclosure of documents pertaining to respondent Corona, mainly to influence public perception and portray Corona as guilty of the charges imputed to him before the court of public opinion.

Trial by technicalities—This refers to the charge of the prosecution that the defense resorts to procedural and technical issues mainly to block the introduction of relevant and pertinent pieces of evidence and virtually delay the impeachment trial.

Scoreboard journalism—This refers to the tendency of mass media to make a judgment, after a day’s hearing on the impeachment case, as to which side, defense or prosecution, has obtained the advantage in the impeachment proceedings for that day.

Insufficiency of allegations—This refers to the defense panel’s claim that the prosecution panel has not made appropriate and clear accusations in the Articles of Impeachment against Corona. This should not be confused with insufficiency of evidence.

Political grandstanding “in aid of reelection”—The tendency of senator-judges to engage in unwanted and unwarranted talk and grandstanding to boost their political stock, create better awareness among voters, and, therefore, help in their reelection.

Judicial torture—This is the consequence of listening to the high-strung voice and nonstop verbal abuse being inflicted by a ballistic Sen. Miriam Defensor-Santiago on the prosecution panel and witnesses, who are not even allowed to talk to refute any of her statements.

Right to scream—This is the exclusive right of Senator Santiago in the ongoing impeachment trial. She has the right to scream at any lawyer, prosecution or defense, or at any witness, and they have no right to scream back at her or answer her statements.

—PHILIP M. LUSTRE JR.,

[email protected]