Being a law student in the Philippines has recently become more exciting.
Not too long ago, the House of Representatives, in what can aptly be termed as level 99 Diner Dash speed, impeached the Chief Justice. Allegedly, in a matter of hours, over half of the lower house signed the articles of impeachment against the Chief Justice, effectively transmitting the process to the Senate for the Impeachment Trial. Of course, the Senate is currently on break, but they have taken their oaths, and the trial is set for Jan. 16 of next year. This is the first time in Philippine History that an impeachment trial will be held for a Chief Justice. The closest to this was probably the complaints filed against former Chief Justice Davide back in 2003, however those never reached the Senate.
Now, I must admit, the current Chief Justice is not really the constitutional exemplar that we hope all Supreme Court justices to be. His appointment to the position was questionable, and he’s never decided a case against former president Arroyo or her allies. He’s been at the helm of more than one questionable move by the supreme court (the TRO on the DOJ, and the unconstitutionality of the Truth Commission to name a few). All in all, you can say he’s a pretty non-partisan guy, semantics and theoretics aside.
Still, even given the hypothetical merits of the case against him, you can’t deny that the whole impeachment process raised a few eyebrows.
I’m not even going to start on how it was the allies of the current president who started and mostly signed the articles of impeachment. Party member/ally or not, as congressmen and women, they have the right to file the complaint. Regardless of motives, if they feel that one of the grounds for impeachment has been “achieved” so to speak, they have every right to initiate the process. No questions there. As a congressperson you have the right. The process is in the constitution.
Ah, process. This is where it gets uncomfortable.
When you look at how it happened, you have to admit, it went by pretty fast. Take note, these are the same people who can’t pass the RH bill or the Freedom of Information Bill. Well, not even pass it, they can’t even reject it. They don’t do anything with it, it’s just lying there. Anyway, I digress. My point is, considering that the House of Representatives has a great reputation for being slow, and largely incomplete during their sessions, it’s a wonder that they got something (fairly long) received, read, signed, and passed, in not even a day.
Everything was at the right place, the right time, and of course, the right people were there.
Then again, we go back to the initial argument. They’re congressmen! That’s their job, to be there! So what if they all chose this one day to finally start shaping up, and it just so happened that on that day they all decided to be good, it was the articles of impeachment that was the hot topic. Okay, let’s give them the benefit of that doubt. (Let’s also not get into the rumors of blackmail).
Then we go to the articles of impeachment themselves. Personally, I think that they could catch Corona on just the charge that he didn’t file his statements of assets and liabilities. Maybe also, that other charge involving his wife and her position and promotions during the Arroyo administration.
My problem is with the other articles.
They mostly question the decisions of the Supreme Court. Take note, none of these decisions were penned by Corona. He merely voted on it (like all the other justices). Do I agree with the decisions? Some no, some yes. The point is, hey it’s not my decision to make whether those decisions were right or wrong. It’s also not the Congress’. It’s the Supreme Court’s.
The decisions in question were not Corona’s alone. They were made with other justices. To put them as grounds for impeachment of one person shows two things. One, there is a personal aspect to this impeachment trial (because why not just catch all the justices? To have signed the articles of impeachment, the Congressman was actually saying, yes I agree that all these grounds have some veracity in them…unless of course they didn’t read the articles that well. *ehem* but hey, presumption of regularity) Two, the Congress, or at least the lower house, were effectively arrogating upon themselves the power to decide cases, the power to say hey no, this decision is wrong, and now you have to be held accountable for it.
While it’s heartening to see the Congress so enthusiastic to perform the job, the problem is, it’s not theirs.
Now, before I say anymore, let me just say that I’m not partisan to the Chief Justice. Like others, I have my reservations about him. I actually think that the Supreme Court might be better off with a (without a doubt) legitimately appointed Chief Justice, who’s a bit more neutral than Chief Justice Corona.
But see, it’s not for me to decide. The case is now with the Senate, and we’ll have to see what they think. Because it’s their power to decide impeachment cases.
The articles of impeachment against the Chief Justice are highly problematic. While there are a few that could carry weight and be legitimate grounds for his impeachment (and I do hope the Senate takes these grounds more seriously), the others which pertain to Supreme Court decisions should cause some alarm. By signing those articles, the congressmen agreed with all of them. Why do I say that? Because if they didn’t, they could have chosen not to sign immediately and discussed it on the floor, striking out the grounds that were doubtful and keeping those which made more sense. So by signing, and therefore agreeing, they also agreed that they were in the position to question the decisions of the Supreme Court.
I can see why some people are saying this is an attack on the judiciary. It is. Will the Judiciary fall, crumble, and die, never to be seen again if Corona is impeached? Of course not. It’s just that the precedent this is setting is alarming. The judiciary’s decisions (and not just the individual judge) is being effectively placed under the scrutiny of a supposedly co-equal body. And who’s to say they (the Congress) are the right ones when in the Constitution, no one branch is really above the other? Does it all come down to power, and who can tweak the process enough?
The Senate will be hearing this case in a few weeks. Let’s see what they find out. If Chief Justice Corona does get impeached, I hope it is for the more valid grounds. He should be made accountable, no question about it. However, if he gets impeached on the grounds of court decisions that they (the SC) all made, then that opens the doors for more impeachments, and who knows when the SC will ever be able to decide anything again.
I understand that right now, it might not seem so bad, seeing as how there’s this universal sentiment that Corona, Arroyo, etc. are the bad guys, and the Aquino administration are the good ones. Fine, all well and good. This just brings me to something I learned from our political theory class way back in second year college. We were talking about totalitarianism, and how it’s dangerous to always view it in an absolute way. We suddenly become blind to the less obvious ways it can creep into our systems, until it’s too late.
I’m not siding with Arroyo or Corona. The former, I want in jail, the latter, I’m still waiting to see. But I think we shouldn’t narrow ourselves to thinking there are only two sides in politics, the good and the bad. We shouldn’t be too quick to side with one party just because the other is increasingly undesirable. We don’t have to take the other side either. We can make our own. We can, at least, not choose based on default.
We should be more responsible than that.
Tags: Politics
