If President Arroyo wants to preserve the integrity and image of the Supreme Court, she should refrain from appointing a new Chief Justice and leave the decision to the next president. Even if the SC ruled that she can name the next Chief Justice, she also has the option not to do it, for the sake of preventing any speculation on the motive behind the appointment.
At this time, an appointment by President Arroyo will only suffer from credibility, with people suspecting that the Supreme Court is controlled by the President since all the justices are appointed by her. The seeming eagerness of the President to name the next Chief Justice in spite of the doubts raised also fuels the doubts that people have regarding this appointment. With the entire Supreme Court ending up to be Arroyo appointees, suspicion as to the members’ independence will certainly not be easily replaced.
It is now in the hands of President Arroyo whether the Supreme Court will be spared from this cloud of suspicion especially by her administration’s critics. Her actions will determine whether the people’s confidence in the Supreme Court will be restored or eroded. While Midas, a king in Greek Mythology (and coincidentally the namesake of the High Court’s spokesperson), turned everything he touched into gold, it seems that the President has the opposite effect on those she lays her hands on. Look at the candidacy of Gibo.
Showing posts with label chief justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label chief justice. Show all posts
Wednesday, March 17, 2010
Monday, April 13, 2009
Chief Justice Puno and the Moral Force Movement: A Delicate Balancing Act
I was a guest this morning at the early morning show in ABS-CBN, in the segment called “Punto por Punto” of Anthony Taberna. The topic was about a comment I made regarding the Moral Force Movement which is supposed to be spearheaded by Chief Justice (http://www.yehey.com/news/Article.aspx?id=237853).
Previously, asked by reporters, I commented that “the Chief Justice’s involvement with the moral recovery group is a very delicate balancing act between being a social conscience and a political player. There is a fine line between the two. While it is true that Philippine society needs moral recovery, there is also no denying that much of it is political reform, and one must join the political fray to be an agent of change in that field. Being the Chief Justice, he must have a conscious effort not to be dragged into politics. But if he really wants to be an agent of moral recovery in politics, he must first relinquish his post in the judiciary and be a full time politician.”
Of course, the media reported it in a simpler way: “Solon asks Chief Justice to resign”. Hence, the interview this morning. Actually, my intent was not to ask the Chief Justice to resign. My intent was to remind him that Politics and the Judiciary don’t mix. It shouldn’t mix. Pretty much like what the Bible says that one cannot serve two masters, one can only choose to be either in the Judiciary or in Politics. But never both. The Judiciary is meant to be apolitical and non-partisan.
That’s why in the field of Law, there is such a principle as the ‘Cold Neutrality of an Impartial Judge”. With the power of finding favor or fault in cases brought before the Court, or interpretation of the law’s intents and purposes in the hands of the Judiciary headed by the Chief Justice, it is imperative that just as the military should be insulated from politics and partisanship, so too must the Chief Justice be.
It is under the same principle that many times in the past I had expressed objection for a politician, presently or formerly engaged in the profession of politics, to be appointed to a judiciary position. Because once a politician, always a politician. And you know what they say about politics being the Art of Compromise.
It may be said that there is nothing wrong for the Chief Justice to make known his desire for moral recovery in this country. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, every Filipino should by now have it in his heart and soul to have moral recovery within himself and call on others to do the same.
But heading a movement that seeks to engage in political moral reform while at the same time being the Chief Justice is opening the leadership of the High Court and the institution itself to vulnerability. To make it clear, I am 100% in agreement and supportive of the goals and objectives of the Moral Force Movement. But my concern is that the Chief and the Court might be unwittingly dragged into an arena that they are supposed to avoid.
While it is the noble intention of the Moral Force to provide a guide and standard in moral governance, it also clear that the agenda is political because the ends is to enable the populace to elect the ideal leaders in the coming 2010 elections. The Moral Force may not want politicians to be a part of their movement, but they are engaged in politics themselves.
And that is the apprehension I expressed over the Chief Justice’s spearheading the Moral Force Movement. While we cannot take away from him the right to speak his mind about the restoration of a government with a firm moral foundation, it will be treading on dangerous political ground for him to spearhead the movement. Especially because several quarters have openly endorsed him to run for president, which he did consider for a while before finally saying he is not interested.
I’m not asking him to resign because one is only asked to resign only if one has committed a mistake or offense. And Chief Justice Puno has not committed a mistake or offense. I continually hold him in high esteem.
But I do remind him to tread carefully. I wouldn’t want him and the High Court to be tainted by the “dirty” field of politics.
Previously, asked by reporters, I commented that “the Chief Justice’s involvement with the moral recovery group is a very delicate balancing act between being a social conscience and a political player. There is a fine line between the two. While it is true that Philippine society needs moral recovery, there is also no denying that much of it is political reform, and one must join the political fray to be an agent of change in that field. Being the Chief Justice, he must have a conscious effort not to be dragged into politics. But if he really wants to be an agent of moral recovery in politics, he must first relinquish his post in the judiciary and be a full time politician.”
Of course, the media reported it in a simpler way: “Solon asks Chief Justice to resign”. Hence, the interview this morning. Actually, my intent was not to ask the Chief Justice to resign. My intent was to remind him that Politics and the Judiciary don’t mix. It shouldn’t mix. Pretty much like what the Bible says that one cannot serve two masters, one can only choose to be either in the Judiciary or in Politics. But never both. The Judiciary is meant to be apolitical and non-partisan.
That’s why in the field of Law, there is such a principle as the ‘Cold Neutrality of an Impartial Judge”. With the power of finding favor or fault in cases brought before the Court, or interpretation of the law’s intents and purposes in the hands of the Judiciary headed by the Chief Justice, it is imperative that just as the military should be insulated from politics and partisanship, so too must the Chief Justice be.
It is under the same principle that many times in the past I had expressed objection for a politician, presently or formerly engaged in the profession of politics, to be appointed to a judiciary position. Because once a politician, always a politician. And you know what they say about politics being the Art of Compromise.
It may be said that there is nothing wrong for the Chief Justice to make known his desire for moral recovery in this country. Indeed, there is nothing wrong with that. In fact, every Filipino should by now have it in his heart and soul to have moral recovery within himself and call on others to do the same.
But heading a movement that seeks to engage in political moral reform while at the same time being the Chief Justice is opening the leadership of the High Court and the institution itself to vulnerability. To make it clear, I am 100% in agreement and supportive of the goals and objectives of the Moral Force Movement. But my concern is that the Chief and the Court might be unwittingly dragged into an arena that they are supposed to avoid.
While it is the noble intention of the Moral Force to provide a guide and standard in moral governance, it also clear that the agenda is political because the ends is to enable the populace to elect the ideal leaders in the coming 2010 elections. The Moral Force may not want politicians to be a part of their movement, but they are engaged in politics themselves.
And that is the apprehension I expressed over the Chief Justice’s spearheading the Moral Force Movement. While we cannot take away from him the right to speak his mind about the restoration of a government with a firm moral foundation, it will be treading on dangerous political ground for him to spearhead the movement. Especially because several quarters have openly endorsed him to run for president, which he did consider for a while before finally saying he is not interested.
I’m not asking him to resign because one is only asked to resign only if one has committed a mistake or offense. And Chief Justice Puno has not committed a mistake or offense. I continually hold him in high esteem.
But I do remind him to tread carefully. I wouldn’t want him and the High Court to be tainted by the “dirty” field of politics.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
