Aquino-SC standoff dangerous to balance of power
President Aquino remains elusive about whether he would seek an extension of his single six-year term beyond 2016 as controversy smolders over the issue of constitutional change.
Instead of hosing down speculations of his intentions after his term lapses, he has shifted public concerns over another term by playing up the conflict between the executive branch and the Supreme Court.
The conflict stems from the high court’s decision that declared unconstitutional the administration’s schemes involving disbursements of pork barrel funds, the lifeblood of patronage that sustains the grip on power by both the presidency and Congress—the political branches of Philippine democracy.
With the Aquino administration winding down its first term in 668 days, the constitutional confrontation between the judiciary and the political branches promises to be a bruising battle where no prisoners are taken and the slain are dragged out of the gory arena, invoking the scenes in Juan Luna’s masterpiece, “Spoliarium.”
Lopsided
The executive branch, armed with the police, prosecution and coercive powers of the state, finds itself aligned with the House of Representatives, which has the power of the purse, in a lopsided gang-up on the Supreme Court.
The high tribunal has stood up to the pressure and browbeating by its political counterparts, finding strength in its mandate as the interpreter of the Constitution and laws of the land.
Not since the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos crippled the powers of review by the Supreme Court with the declaration of martial law in September 1972 has any administration mounted an attack on the high court.
The attacks are intended to clip the powers of the tribunal and intimidate it from discharging its judicial duties in curbing abuse in the disbursement of public funds through the Disbursement Acceleration Fund (DAP).
Judicial overreach
It is odd and hard to believe that despite the preponderance of executive powers the President feels threatened by the Supreme Court.
Mr. Aquino has accused the court of “judicial overreach” after it struck down as unconstitutional, in a 13-0 decision of July 1, his economic stimulus program in the guise of the DAP.
The President used the overreach issue as a convenient reason to defend himself from criticism that stemmed from his statement that he was open to suggestions to amend 1987 Constitution.
Not that he was lusting for a second term, but rather he was concerned over “too much meddling” by the court in the functions of the executive department and the legislature.
In a radio interview on Thursday, Mr. Aquino said he was open to calls for amending the Constitution to set “limits” on “judicial overreach.” He said judicial overreach had to be reviewed and limits must be put in place.
“It seems that the judiciary has been meddling a lot and this makes it difficult for us to run government,” he said.
Scapegoat
The interview served as a platform for making the Supreme Court the scapegoat for the underperformance of the administration, which has been in power for more than four years and is still struggling to make up for its shortfalls in the remaining days of its term.
The interview also explained the President’s somersault from his promise in 2010 not to seek a second term to enable him to accomplish the reforms he had set out at the beginning of his term.
He said he was consulting his “bosses,” the Filipino people, on how to continue the reforms he started and how to make them permanent.
We have no idea of what voices he has been hearing from his bosses, but we know that the administration has the means and the motivation to fabricate a “clamor” for him to seek another term.
For example, Interior Secretary Mar Roxas said he put the idea of term extension for the President because of the “clamor of the people supporting” Mr. Aquino’s “daang matuwid” (straight path) campaign to ensure continuity of his governance reforms.
This claim appears to have caught fire and has become too irresistible for Mr. Aquino.
SC standing ground
But the Supreme Court is standing its ground in maintaining its independence amid the administration’s blandishments and attempts to overturn the ruling on the DAP.
In a media conference on Thursday, Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno, who was appointed by Mr. Aquino, defied Malacañang’s pressure when she called on the public to keep faith in the judiciary, saying its strength was anchored on public trust.
Responding to Mr. Aquino’s attacks on the court’s overreach, the Chief Justice reaffirmed the oath she took two years ago, pointedly reminding the administration that the court’s loyalty lies in the Constitution, not in the appointing powers.
Sereno said the high court would uphold its independence no matter who is inconvenienced.
“It is always important for me to uphold the independence of my office on a daily basis. It is important that people see the Chief Justice has the Constitution first and foremost on her mind, and her devotion to duty and her loyalty to country is always unquestioned,” she said.
Judiciary’s strength
Sereno said it should be clear to everybody that the Supreme Court could be loyal only to the Constitution, adding that “[t]he judiciary is strong if the people believe in it.”
She spoke hours after Mr. Aquino declared in a radio interview his openness to Charter change, if only to keep the judiciary’s powers in check.
The President has also called on the high court to show greater transparency in the disclosure of the justices’ statements of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALNs).
In an attempt to embarrass the high court, he made the call after the justices rejected a request from Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Henares for copies of their SALNs as part of an investigation of alleged corruption in the court.
Sereno earlier questioned the timing of the House inquiry into the court’s Judicial Development Fund, saying the move did not show a healthy relationship between the two branches of government.
The retaliation of the executive and legislative branches against the judiciary signals that their confrontation has taken a nasty turn with implications for the independence of the judicial system.
This is dangerous to the delicate balance of power in the constitutional system. The system stands to lose more from weakening the court.
RELATED STORIES
CBCP execs want Aquino’s final answer
Sereno: SC is an independent court
