Tag Archives: Supreme court

An infirm cybercrime prevention act

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto's revenge?

Senate Majority Leader Vicente Sotto’s revenge?

I have so far published the following blogs, http://quierosaber.wordpress.com/2012/10/04/damage-control-over-cybercrime-law/

http://quierosaber.wordpress.com/2012/09/19/ironic-side-of-cybercrime-prevention-law/

http://quierosaber.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/internet-users-bewail-aquinos-support-of-cybercrime-law/, where I strongly criticized the legality of the cybercrime law going after those who are simply expressing their opinion and/or exasperation on certain personalities and charging them for online libel.

This is what makes the law infirm and controversial as it is being decided now by the Supreme Court (SC).

There is no doubt the country needs this law, but it should be a law made to prevent the commission of dreadful crimes perpetrated by unscrupulous people in order to protect the public or entities from any downside.

It should not be, therefore, a self-serving law.

Sen. Teofisto Guingona could not have said it any better when he appeared before the SC, which is hearing the various petitions questioning the constitutionality of the anti-cybercrime measure, saying: “We fear that this law gives the State unlimited powers to invade our lives, intruding into spheres long protected by constitutional rights. We are anxious that it will limit our rights to ventilate matters of public concern and interest, especially matters of importance to us, which involve transparency, accountability, and people participation.”

He added: “We are angry because we have always trusted that laws are for the good of persons and society. The Cybercrime Prevention Act is a law that threatens and assaults our fundamental Constitutional right to speak, our right against unreasonable searches and seizures, our right against double jeopardy, and our right to be accorded equal protection of the laws.”

In one of the above mentioned blogs, I had this to say: “It is not like we are fomenting trouble. We are simply expressing our freedom of speech and those who gets alluded to or named should not run amok, but rather be more considerate, serviceable and sensitive to the needs of the Filipino people.”

What is being said may not necessarily conform with the thinking of those being alluded to, but being politicians or in public service, you, honorable sirs, are fair game. And we are not stupid, nor blind not to be able to see your stand, your motivation, your interest, and even your body language, on matters concerning certain issues that tends to prejudice the interest and well being of the larger number of people.

This law should not be used against those who are law abiding citizens, who want simply to exercise their freedom of expression borne out of frustration and exasperation over self-centered personalities and, some, simpletons at that. Not that you are in power and influential that you could just curtail our freedom and on top of that, prosecute us.

Come on! Give us a break.

Nation lost Robredo but gained Sereno

Associate Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno will be 24th Supreme Court Chief Justice and the first female CJ.

In the midst of a grieving nation over the death of Interior and Local Government Secretary Jesse Robredo, President Benigno Aquino (PNoy) appointed Supreme Court (SC) Justice Maria Lourdes Punzalan Aranal Sereno as Chief Justice (CJ), thus, making her the first woman to occupy that exalted position in the nation’s history.

It is not only history making, but we would like to think that in the same manner that President Aquino appointed and re-appointed Robredo for the position of Interior Secretary because he believed in the man’s competence, integrity, commitment, vision and selfless dedication to service for the people, that PNoy also used the same underlying concept in selecting Sereno as CJ.

PNoy never doubted and wavered in his support for Robredo no matter the times the latter was ignominiously by-passed by the Commission on Appointments (CA). He got vindicated only upon Robredo’s death – and so was Robredo.

Although Robredo and Sereno belong to different branches of government, I have faith in the gut-feel of PNoy that his choice of Sereno to head the nation’s judiciary will be of great service to this nation, especially that Sereno, at 52 years old, will serve as the 24th CJ for 18 more years or until 2030, when she retires.

Acknowledging the importance of the judicial branch in this country, which reputation has lately has been marred by serious imputations of impartiality, of flip-flopping, of dishonesty, of being corrupt, etc., PNoy must have found in Sereno the right person to bring back the respect of the people for the SC with her unquestioned morality and intellectual prowess.

The damage done by former CJ Renato Corona on the credibility of the SC, which led to his impeachment by Congress with a resounding 20-3 vote last May 29, has put the SC in bad light, that Sereno’s job is not only to undertake much needed reforms within, but also to establish the interdependence of the judiciary with the executive and legislative branches of government and have the same respected by all.

In her statement posted on the SC website, Sereno said she would serve the country “with integrity and conviction” to restore the “people’s faith in good government.”

“I humbly accept this responsibility and by God’s grace commit myself to help fulfill the Filipino’s quest for true justice,” she added.

Well said.

It will be noted that Sereno was appointed as associate justice of the SC by PNoy in 2010. She was the president’s first appointee to the High Court.

Her appointment this time, as the first female chief magistrate of the land, is an affirmation that, like PNoy’s trust and confidence in Robredo, he has the same complete trust and confidence in Sereno that she will make the SC and the country’s judicial system a refuge for justice by the people, for the people and of the people, especially the marginalized ones, instead of being a sanctuary of the high and mighty.

Yes, the nation may have lost a good and brilliant leader in Robredo, but, in the same token, it has also gained a capable and intelligent woman in Sereno that has 18 years ahead of her to fulfill the legacy of good, transparent,credible and effective governance that PNoy wants implemented as well  in the country’s judicial branch.

Supreme Court insider and not outsider for Chief Justice

The Judicial Bar Council

The Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) is about finished interviewing nominees for Chief Justice (CJ) and will soon go on with the selection process as to whose names will be submitted to choose from by President Benigno Aquino (PNoy).

This, even as Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile and House Speaker Sonny Belmonte, as well as Senate committee on justice chairman Senator Francis ‘Chiz’ Escudero and his House counterpart Rep. Niel Tupas agreed to pull out of the JBC following a SC ruling allowing only one representation from Congress to JBC.

But, even without Congress participating, and no matter how flawed JBC may be in its composition, as seen by Enrile, it has a role to play as a constitutionally-created body that recommends appointees for vacancies that may arise in the composition of the Supreme Court and other lower courts.

The question now is: Is JBC going to recommend a Supreme Court (SC) insider or an outsider?

So that the JBC members will not be accused of being biased for one or the other, it is a given that the recommended persons to be selected by President Aquino will be coming from both parties.

President Benigno Aquino

The question becomes critical and significant, and will determine the performance of the SC, when the same is asked of PNoy. It is important that he makes the right choice for it is one of the crucial legacies he will be leaving behind once he steps down from the presidency.

Among the candidates interviewed, it has been observed that most of those who were comfortable answering questions from the panel – more eloquent, more assertive, more confident, and seemingly more competent to occupy the position of CJ are the SC insiders, namely, Justice Antonio Carpio, Justice Presbitero Velasco Jr., Justice Teresita Leonardo de Castro, Justice Arturo Brion, Justice Roberto Abad and Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

Not only is it advantageous to appoint a replacement for CJ from within, knowing already fully well the intricacies, the processes and even the politics inside, but they rightfully deserve to be the only group to be chosen from in as much as they earned their stay position through hard work and sacrifice, not to mention their intelligence and probity. In fact they are classified from the most junior to the most senior, with the latter given the preference.

Unfortunately, such is not the case today.

But, since they have reached that distinguished position of Associate Justice of the SC, would you robbed any of them now of the opportunity to fulfill their dream of heading that most coveted position in the judiciary, the CJ of the SC?

It is for this reason that, I hope, PNoy will be guided to appoint a SC insider for CJ.

It is only fair.

So, when should we be considering then SC outsiders for SC inside positions? The answer is – only when there is vacancy in the roster of Associate Justices.

It is only fair.

(Please read related article: Search for Corona’s replacement ,  dated June 23, 2012. – Quierosaber)

Search for Corona’s replacement

Senator Joker Arroyo

I could not agree more with Sen. Joker Arroyo when he said that the search for the next Chief Justice (CJ) has become ridiculous. Imagine the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) already in receipt of 50 aspirants and counting! When will it stop?

It is not only getting ridiculous in numbers, but it seems to be getting wilder, too, what with searching for the seemingly qualified candidates being done in the most unlikely places, but in the judicial bench.

Indeed, why make things complicated? Why make the decision outside the box when all these times we had been thinking inside the box when it comes to choosing the successor of a retiring CJ or a booted out CJ, for that matter?

Sen. Arroyo said the “usual route” to the position of Chief Justice was that of an associate justice.

“Time was when a lawyer’s dream was to be a justice of the high court where he can shine with the decisions he pens. He need not be chief justice to shine,” he said. “Now, aspirants want to pole vault, leap frog to the chief justiceship without starting as an associate justice.”

Is that how cheap the position of the magistrates in the Supreme Court (SC) has become?

What I am simply saying is that if there is vacancy in the topmost position of the SC, why not choose automatically from the ranks of the Associate Justices (AJ)? It is also the dream of every AJ to become CJ. Give them a break. They have work hard and long enough to be where they are.

Even when filling up the position of an AJ of the SC, there is no more fertile grounds to seek them out from than in the judicial hierarchy of courts. Again, it is every lawyer’s ambition to have enough qualification for him or her to sit as judge in a court. It is every lawyer’s aspiration to prepare for any position in the judicial system in his/her latter years. So why go to the extent of looking for lawyers that has no experience sitting on the bench?

It will give credence to the system of choosing justices of the SC if the JBC will reflect on the valid observation of Sen. Arroyo. For now what they are doing is equally ridiculous.

Could anybody blame Arroyo in his statement, saying: “Every Tom, Dick and Harry wants to be Chief Justice.”?

DOJ, BIR chiefs should decline CJ nomination

DOJ Secretary Leila de Lima and BIR Commissioner Kim Jacinto-Henares

Many think Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago is out of her rocker, like I do, but, hey, let’s give credit where credit is due.

The feisty lady senator should be lauded for her recent pronouncement that Justice Secretary Leila de Lima and Bureau of Internal Revenue commissioner Kim Jacinto-Henares are not morally fit to be considered for the post of Chief Justice (CJ).

“It’s not necessarily disqualification to be a member of the Cabinet but if they participated in the impeachment trial it cannot be helped but raise doubts in the minds of the public that they were testifying so they could get rid of the incumbent and replace him,” Santiago said in an interview with reporters.

This is not only an astute observation, but a reasonable and valid assessment as well.

It is therefore in the best interest of the nation and to the advantage of the general public that de Lima and Henares decline the offer for the CJ position, much less their nomination as candidates.

It is not only the right thing to do, but it is showing the highest sense of delicadeza (propriety) by a public servant involved, one way or the other, directly or indirectly, in a very high profile case such as the ousting of no less than the CJ of the Supreme Court.

Let us not add more controversy to what we already have been subjected to. Enough is enough.

Let us move forward and have a short list of candidates instead who are less controversial and more deserving of the position of a CJ to choose from.

There are plenty of judges in all levels of the judiciary who have shown conviction, knowledge of the law and exemplary behavior, and who are more worthy than any politician or political ally out there.

Let us be fair. Let us give others the chance to serve.

Let us choose the best – one that is not beholden to any political potentate.

An able Chief Justice we will never have

 

Supreme Court Associate Justice Antonio Carpio

Jack Welch, the outspoken former GE CEO and management guru, once said: “Control your own destiny or someone else will.”

This may have happen to many of us – that someone else has been able to alter the path that we wanted to follow. Not that it cannot be reverse using our will, but if it is somebody powerful and influential who has all the resources to redirect the way we want to go, somehow it makes you a failure to get where you want to be and to fight will only be an exercise in futility.

Such is the case of Associate Justice Antonio Carpio.

It is every lawyer-worth-his-salt’s dream to, one day, assume the leadership of the highest court of the land – the Supreme Court (SC) and Carpio did not only worked hard for it, but had the years poised to replace Chief Justice (CJ) Renato Puno upon the latter’s retirement on May 17, 2010.

Destiny would have been Carpio’s, but for President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s (GMA) intervention, it was not meant to be.

GMA chose her yes man, Renato Corona.

It will be recalled that President Arroyo named Corona as SC associate justice on April 9, 2002. He was one of the youngest magistrates ever appointed to the high tribunal. Before that, he was President Arroyo’s chief of staff, spokesman, and acting executive secretary.

Though Carpio was also a GMA appointee, the former knew he could never be the latter’s choice as a check on previous Supreme Court rulings on controversial cases involving the Arroyo administration revealed that Corona usually voted in favor of the administration while Carpio voted against it.

The rest is history as everybody knew that with Corona at the helm, and with almost all of the members of the high court her appointees, she was assuredly clothed with legal protection if and when she bows out as president.

Or that was how she thought and believed it would be, until the shit hits the fan and she found herself confined to house and later to hospital arrest and Corona was not able to save her, nor Corona been able to save Corona himself.

So, what makes me say then that Carpio is an able CJ that we will never have?

Because, from the very beginning, and even while he was still a student, Carpio already showed the kind of person that he was.

“Let us not…delude ourselves into believing that a new constitution would immediately eradicate the ills that plague our country. Nor can we expect that tinkering with the constitution will totally purge it of its defects and make this nation great again…. One thing we cannot afford to overlook nor downgrade the importance of the human element. A basically workable constitution or law can become defective in the hands of enthroned rascals, as we are now experiencing,” wrote Antonio Tirol Carpio.

No, this was not written recently but was penned by him when he was a 20-year-old senior economics student of the Ateneo de Manila University in 1969. Published in The Guidon, of which Carpio was then editor in chief, the piece mirrored tumultuous times.

What he wrote then was providential, if not prophetic, for the injustices and societal inequities that he was fighting against during the Marcos regime continued throughout his career in law and the judiciary.

“The most important qualification of a judge is independence, not brilliance,” Carpio once told a former associate, and that explains his actuation in the SC.

Isn’t this what the SC justices are all about – has mastery of the law, has independence of mind, has delicadeza or high sense of propriety, has respect for the constitution, has unquestioned integrity, and is not a political stooge?

Alas, Carpio qualifies as an able CJ, but he will never be one.

Not during President Aquino’s watch.

 

 

Impeachment trial far from being Corona’s “calvary”

Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona

Chief Justice Renato Corona has been going around the country making speeches and almost always viciously attacking President Benigno Aquino for being instrumental in having the on-going impeachment trial against him.

He has always been mouthing that the reason why Aquino wants him ousted as chief magistrate of the Supreme Court is because of his stand in the Hacienda Luisita, where the sprawling sugar estate owned by the President’s family is bound to loss billions of pesos. But, is this all there is to it?

As the impeachment trial progresses, the people are seeing more and more of the character of Corona as being questionable and assailable and not worthy of the position entrusted to him.

But, this is precisely the reason why he has been having speaking engagement – to elicit support and sympathy by projecting himself as the abused, the persecuted, and the martyred one.

In fact during his recent talk at the 15th National Convention of the Philippine Association of Court Employees in Puerto Princesa he intimated that his intention to testify at his own impeachment trial in the Senate is just the start of his “calvary.”

What a baloney!

Calvary is the hill outside Jerusalem on which Jesus was crucified.

Jesus was crucified because He was getting too powerful, too popular, and the leaders of the Jews started getting threatened by Him simply because He was telling people about Christianity.

How could the impeachment court be Corona’s calvary when he has been losing followers, is and has never been a threat to Aquino’s governance and has been perceived to be lying in most of his pronouncements that has something to do with his impeachment that people has lost trust in him.

Jesus was crucified by the senate of their time because He was telling the truth.

The same cannot be said of Corona as he is being tried by the Senate impeachment court.

There lies the beginning and end of their similarity – the senate taking part in deciding their cases.

In truth, Corona is his own calvary and the articles of impeachment filed against him is his undoing.

Resurrect truth and not lies

The senator-judges inside the senate impeachment court

After the Lenten season respite we will soon again be pestered, nay humored, with the continuation of the Corona impeachment trial.

Not seeing the proceedings and reading about it the papers was very much a relief. For a while we have forgotten that there was this vexing problem confronting the nation and its people about the highest officer of the country’s judicial system brought to task for doing the unthinkable.

But, like a balm, its soothing effect will soon subside and once again we shall be experiencing that gnawing discomfort.

The chief justice has been lately in the news mouthing, nay complaining, about his predicament of being demonized by his adversaries, to include some the senator-judges whom he perceives to be for the administration.

“As if the impeachment trial were not enough, some senator-judges have taken on the role of prosecutors and have converted what should be an adversarial proceeding into an inquisition,” he said without naming names in a speech titled “Excellence in Law: Destiny of the Ateneo Lawyer.”

“I can no longer count how many of my constitutional rights have been blatantly and grossly violated,” he said.

Look who is talking? Doesn’t he know what the surveys/polls say about him?

On the other hand there is Senator Gregorio Honasan who has been shooting his mouth off by making a statement, saying, that “organized hypocrisy” in the country was getting in the way of the nation’s economic progress.

He added that these “hypocrites “all of a sudden have (become)…experts on the law, on the impeachment trial,” referring to the impeachment trial of Chief Justice.

Why, does one have to be an expert on the law to determine whether or not Corona erred in his capacity as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court? It is not even about having done wrong, but more than that. It is about having the moral ascendancy to continue occupying an important position which supposedly is the bulwark of fair and impartial justice. How could he continue to be a leading example of highest probity? Is Honasan saying that all the charges against Corona are fabricated?

Honasan was even worst during his heydays in the military. What can you say of an officer who has been trying to topple the Cory’s presidency several times – thank goodness, unsuccessfully! What a shame! Look where he is now. Blame it to the electorate who has the weakness of voting for the notorious.

All I am saying here is this: Let us get this circus that is the impeachment trial over with. We have had enough. Let’s move on and help the government of President Benigno Aquino get rid of nincompoops and corrupt officials and start supporting in building up this nation.

All I am asking is this: As Christ death triumphed over the forces of evil, so we should urge the senator-judges in the Corona impeachment trial to ensure that when decision time comes they should be one in making truth triumphant over lies, and one in championing the honesty and integrity of courts judges and justices who are, supposedly, the refuge of the downtrodden in our society.

(Relative to this please read Quierosaber’s blog: The Corona impeachment is all about truth, dated March 9, 2012)

The SC’s unreasonable TRO

 

CJ Renato Corona

The impeachment trial of Renato Corona, which is hampering the smooth governance of this country and pestering, if not numbing, the sensibilities of the Filipino people could have been easily cut short if the senate, sitting as an impeachment court, voted for the rejection of the Supreme Court’s (SC) issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) on the opening of the dollar accounts of the Chief Justice (CJ).

The proceeding that is being undertaken to find out whether or not CJ Corona committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) as required by the Constitution  or that he is suspected of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits… is not about going against the propriety of the SC as a co-equal branch of government, but rather looking into the propriety of the person, whether or not he deserves to be where he is ensconced at.

It is not about the office. It is about the integrity and the ascendancy of one where trust and confidence are reposed upon for leading the critical judicial system of the country.

I am not a lawyer, but if the thinking of a non-lawyer jibes with the pronouncements of some members of the SC who is suppose to be independently minded, then where could I go wrong?

As an ordinary citizen confronted with this negative historical event, I, like everybody else, simply wants the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.

If CJ Corona is clean and does not want people to think that he has committed a crime, and if his dollar account is what is going to set him free, for it is the truth, then why did he still seek the help of his colleagues, most of whom, like him, are ex-President Gloria Arroyo’s appointees, to issue a TRO?

“The world will now know that Philippine foreign currency deposit accounts provide a much better safe haven for ill-gotten wealth than Swiss bank accounts,” Supreme Court Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said.

Similarly, another dissenting opinion coming from Associate Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno said that the Supreme Court order stopping the opening of Chief Justice Renato Corona’s dollar accounts has created “a safe haven for criminal acts” and “cultivated an atmosphere of impunity.”

Indeed, Republic Act 6426, the Foreign Currency Deposit Act, is intended to protect non-residents to encourage the inflow of foreign currency deposits in Philippine banks.

But, no doubt, it also serves as depository for privacy of your money, whether legally owned or ill-gotten.

So privacy is a big deal if you have caboodles of money you don’t want other people to know about.

But, what is wrong with having huge amount of foreign currency kept secret in a bank if disclosing the same or giving instructions to the bank to disclose the same won’t taint the integrity of your persona?

Why continue adopting the doctor/patient privacy or the lawyer/client confidentiality if all information/entry contained therein are above board?

It is sad to say that, where the truth was near to being revealed, with the untimely and unreasonable TRO, it has made a doubtful concealment of the truth. Definitely this does not speak well of the justices that formed the majority decision.

It is even despairing to note that majority of the senator-judges opt to agree with the ruling of the SC when they could have made this dismal trial end sooner than later.