Truth, justice and peace

“Lord, make me an instrument of your peace…” Though Catholic in origin, this famous prayer of St. Francis of Assisi has been invoked by both Catholics and non-Catholics (like former US president Bill Clinton and former British prime minister Margaret Thatcher), immortalized in movies (like “Rambo”) and TV serials (like “Band of Brothers”), and magnified in countless tunes, dances and dramas.

Aims of search. Since the beginning of time, peace has been the elusive quest and the eternal aspiration of humankind. It is also the desideratum of the Comprehensive Agreement on the Bangsamoro (CAB) and the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law (BBL). However, before real peace can be attained, I think there must first be justice. And before justice can be reached, there must first be truth.

The search for truth is conducted with varied aims and employs varied methods crafted precisely to achieve those aims. For example, congressional investigations are held “in aid of legislation.” Hence, there are no opposing parties, no complainants and respondents, no plaintiffs and defendants, not even witnesses, only “resource persons” who are invited (or sometimes subpoenaed) to shed light on facts and events to assist Congress in its task of legislation.

This kind of search is exemplified by the current much-publicized investigations in the Senate and in the House, which are conducted with the aim of discovering gaps and lapses that attended the killing of 44 Special Action Force (SAF) officers in Mamasapano, Maguindanao.

These inquiries may show the need for laws that appropriate more funds for the armory and training of the police, or require better coordination among the country’s armed units, or provide more stringent safeguards for the BBL.

Methods of search. The methodology in congressional inquiries is not “adversarial” in nature; thus, resource persons are not given the opportunity to cross-examine those who may have linked them to crimes, malfeasance, or irregularities. The questions asked by lawmakers are many times misleading, complex or argumentative. They will not pass judicial standards.

Since the aim of congressional investigations is not the prosecution or conviction of criminal offenders and the methodology employed is not adversarial in nature, the truth arrived at is limited in its scope; it is not enough to convict anyone of any crime. It may, however, suffice for impeachment, which is more of a political than a legal process. While Congress can recommend the prosecution of crimes, it cannot by itself prosecute, much less convict, criminals.

Sometimes legislative investigations, though one-sided, show incontrovertible or admitted incompetence or misfeasance so overwhelming and so damning that the public officials concerned are constrained to resign, like Philippine National Police Chief Alan Purisima.

On the other hand, if the purpose of the search for truth is to discover crimes, and to indict possible criminals, then it is the Department of Justice (DOJ) or the Office of the Ombudsman (OOO), not Congress, that conducts the investigation.

Here the methodology of arriving at the truth is different: The respondents are given the opportunity to defend themselves before they are criminally indicted.

Should “probable cause” be found, then the DOJ or the OOO shall file the proper charges in our courts of law, where the methods in searching for the truth are more stringent. The accused are given the chance to defend themselves, to cross-examine the witnesses against them, and to avail themselves of the constitutional guarantee that “[n]o person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law, nor shall any person be denied the equal protection of the laws.”

The search for truth is also conducted by the Board of Inquiry of the Philippine National Police. Since its goal is not legislation or prosecution or conviction of a crime, but the improvement of the police service, then its methodology is simpler.

From these searches for truth comes justice in terms of resignation for the conscience-stricken, remedial legislation, streamlining of military processes, and administrative and judicial sanctions for the guilty. These verities of truth and justice are not inconsistent with the peace goals of the BBL. In fact, I dare say that a BBL that prudently takes them into account will lead to more lasting peace for all.

* * *

The Asean Law Association (ALA) will hold its general assembly at the Makati Shangri-la hotel on Feb. 26-28, with over 300 jurists, academics and practicing lawyers from the 10 Asean countries (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Laos, Myanmar, Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand, Singapore and Vietnam) attending.

With the theme “Sharing Prosperity at the Crossroads of Asean Integration—the Legal Challenges,” the assembly will be keynoted by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P.A. Sereno who will later host a “Summit of Chief Justices” on March 1-3 in Boracay. I have been invited to address the opening luncheon on Feb. 26.

Based on the rotational system, this year marks the turn of the Philippines to assume the ALA leadership. The ALA Philippine Chapter has nominated Accra Law’s founding partner Avelino V. Cruz to succeed Indonesian Chief Justice Hatta Ali as ALA’s president for 2015-2017.

The ALA conferences are sponsored by the Supreme Court, the ALA Philippine Chapter and the Foundation for Liberty and Prosperity. Those interested may register on line via alamanila2015.com.

* * *

Comments to [email protected]