President Aquino escalated the conflict between his administration and the Supreme Court with a withering broadside on Thursday, blasting the high tribunal for its reversal of decisions that, he said, made governing the country “untenable.”
He fired the heavy guns of the presidency days after the high court ordered on November 22 the dismantling of the stock distribution option (SDO) scheme put in place in Hacienda Luisita by President Cory Aquino in 1989 to evade distribution of the estate to farm workers.
The attack was seen by a number of people as a swift retaliation by the administration against the court for issuing a decision that struck at the heart of the economic power base of the Aquino-Cojuangco political dynasty.
Mr. Aquino denounced the court for the reversal of several of its decisions which, he said, were not only “confusing” but also creating “judicial uncertainty” that made the job for executives and business leaders difficult.
He questioned the impartiality of the court, 12 of whose members were appointed by then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, on its decisions related to cases involving now Pampanga Representative Arroyo, who faces prosecution for a number of offenses, including alleged poll rigging, graft and corruption, and plunder.
The President railed at the court during the 30th anniversary celebration of the Makati Business Club (MBC) on Thursday, converting it as a bully pulpit to defend himself from criticism over his heavy-handed handling of the cases involving Arroyo, and to carry out a running battle with the tribunal since his inauguration into the presidency in July last year.
Parlous economy
In using the business gathering as a platform of his bully pulpit, curiously, his speech focused on the theme of his vicious feud with Arroyo, ignoring the state of the parlous economy and the court’s decision on the Luisita SDO.
The MBC seems to be the wrong venue in which to deliver another thundering Sermon on the Mount on the rectitude of the administration in the battle against corruption in public office.
There was nothing in the speech about how the administration would revitalize the flagging economy. It did not speak of economic programs, which he omitted in his first State of the Nation Address (Sona) in July.
The Hacienda Luisita issue similarly received a short shrift in the MBC speech, as it was in the Sona, as if it was a skeleton in the closet of the Aquino-Cojuangco political dynasty.
In speaking at the MBC, the President disappointed some businessmen who expected to hear a presentation of the concrete programs on how to boost economic growth, rather than incantations on “daan matuwid” as a magic formula to reduce poverty and bring food to the table of the poor.
The MBC, in its several statements over the past few months, has expressed concern over the underinvestment in infrastructure as necessary in driving economic growth so it can create more jobs.
Powerful weapon
In speaking before the MBC, Mr. Aquino availed himself of the bully pulpit—one of the most powerful weapons in the arsenal of the Philippine presidency—in mobilizing public opinion behind his policy objectives, including holding past officials accountable for alleged misdeeds.
This weapon is available exclusively to the presidency, including control of the entire bureaucracy, the judicial prosecution machinery, budgetary appropriations, the police, the armed forces, and the entire propaganda apparatus of government. These are not available to Congress or to the Supreme Court.
This is what makes the clash between the President and the court an uneven contest. This is why there is more reason to monitor the actions of the President in prosecuting Arroyo than those of the Supreme Court in giving due course to the petitions of Arroyo.
Mr. Aquino is sparing none of his weapons when he sought to discredit the court and to erode further its credibility. Reeking with self-righteousness, he catalogued a litany of accusations against the Supreme Court. He depicted himself as having been incapacitated to do reforms by some court decisions.
Here are some of the highlights of his tirades, from his own words, so the public can decide whether to damn the court being demonized.
“I was puzzled, even alarmed, by the behavior of the Supreme Court. Our people established our government to uphold the public good; we in the executive need: clarity in the rules, consistency in its interpretations, and a modicum of respect so that we can implement our plans. Therefore, what confronts me now is a central question: Can the executive fulfill its mandate given the current air of judicial uncertainty?”
He went on to say, “Because of the system of checks and balances … there is a built-in safeguard, a designated arbiter, when disagreements or questions arise. This arbiter … is supposed to be the Supreme Court. But this is premised on a fundamental assumption: that it will be objective and nonpartisan.
“When our lawyers all know that it takes the Supreme Court 10 days, normally, to attend to motions, and it decides to issue a TRO for Mrs. Arroyo in three, who can avoid wondering what she did, to merit such speedy relief?
“When, in deliberating on the TRO asked for by Mrs. Arroyo, the majority relied solely on the say-so of Mrs. Arroyo’s lawyers, when any review of the documents submitted to the court showed that she herself couldn’t make up her mind which cities she wanted to go to, how many people she wanted to bring, or what she wanted to do—see or attend forums—who can avoid wondering if her main priority was to escape the arm of the law?”
What about the shortcut by the government to produce a charge of election sabotage in two hours to enable the Pasay court to issue a warrant of arrest of Arroyo?
Intervention
The President said; “We are not out to dictate upon the court, much less spark a constitutional crisis. No one should fear a healthy balance where all sides are heard, and empowered to assert not only their constitutional rights, but to fulfill their constitutional obligations. We ask these questions, not out of desire to undermine their positions, not out of disrespect and malice, but to fulfill our mandate and to our bosses, the Filipino people—all of you here included.”
The above is not a summation of pleadings from a public prosecutor before the Pasay City Regional Trial Court where a complaint of election sabotage has been brought against Arroyo.
It is a pleading by the President of the Republic in the arena of public opinion in his case against Arroyo and the Supreme Court.
It is an unwarranted intervention by the Chief Executive in the judicial process, throwing the whole weight of his powers behind his attack on the court’s independence. It’s fair to ask, who can win against this all-out offensive, at all costs?
==============================================================================
By: Amando Doronilla
Source: Philippine Daily Inquirer, December 5, 2011
To view the original article, click here.
Comment here