Not for Corona to say

Judicial independence?
AMADO P. MACASAET

‘Who will correct the mistakes of the Supreme Court? Nobody. But there is a way: impeach the Chief Justice so that the independence of the Court may be restored.’

CHIEF Justice Renato C. Corona was ranting all over the place - going as far as gathering a sparse crowd of inferior court judges, four of his own peers - to declare that he would stake his own life to maintain the independence of the Judiciary.

On the other hand, President Aquino caused the impeachment of the Head Magistrate because he wants to restore - meaning it has been lost - the independence of the Supreme Court.

The protagonists are fighting for the same cause. One must be wrong. The other must be right.

If we trace the events that led to the present controversy, we can unquestionably declare that the Chief Justice should be held responsible for the "loss" of independence of the Highest Tribunal.

While he inhibited from the deliberations that led to the ruling that the President may make an appointment to the judiciary during a period prohibited by the Constitution, Mr. Corona was the lone beneficiary of that decision.

The Court might have been pressured by Gloria Arroyo to make the ruling so that Mr. Corona, canine loyal to her ever since, may be appointed Chief Justice. The day the Court promulgated the ruling, its independence was irretrievably lost.

Mr. Corona lent himself to the loss of the independence of the Highest Tribunal when he accepted the appointment, knowing as a magistrate that the decision, penned by Associate Justice Lucas Bersamin, was shameful and wrong.

Corona accepted the appointment clearly based on the doctrine that the Supreme Court is right even when it is wrong. The Court misinterpreted the Constitution only for one purpose, to fill a vacancy left by the early retirement of Chief Justice Reynato Puno.

I hazard the guess that if Gloria Arroyo did not have the strongest desire to appoint Mr. Corona as head of the Court, she would have allowed the post left by Chief Justice Puno vacant until a new president was elected.

Or if she did not want to see a Supreme Court without a Chief Justice, she would have prevailed upon Mr. Puno not to retire. But she did not, precisely to create a vacancy for Renato Corona to fill.

Is this the "independence" of the Judiciary that Chief Justice Corona now says he is willing to stake his life for? It appears he has that desire, probably to fulfill a commitment to Gloria Arroyo that with him as Chief Justice, she should not worry about the charges of plunder that both of them may have known would likely be filed.

If this is the case, as it appears to be, we can say without contradiction except from Mr. Corona and his few followers, that what he wants is for the Court to keep its loyalty to the former President, not to the law.

This is not anybody’s - except Chief Justice Corona’s - idea of an independent Judiciary. Unless the Head of the Court is removed by impeachment, the present "independence" will remain long after President Aquino steps down on June 30, 2016.
Mrs. Arroyo packed the Court with jurists loyal to her beyond the term of the incumbent President.

In a democracy, the Supreme Court has the last word about the interpretation of the Constitution and the laws. In this case, the "misinterpretation" is part of the law of the land. It opens the door to more abuses by future presidents.

Who will correct the mistakes of the Supreme Court? Nobody. But there is a way: impeach the Chief Justice so that the independence of the Court may be restored.

In obvious desperation, Chief Justice Corona has mounted a campaign for support, claiming that the President is a dictator and that his impeachment will destroy the independence of the Judiciary.

He went as far as saying that President Aquino is a know-nothing Chief Executive. PNoy is stupid, as the Chief Justice declared in his latest attack.

Which is a more stupid act? Accepting a "midnight" appointment made possible by the Court at the behest of Gloria Arroyo? Or the President causing the impeachment of the Chief Justice as the only way to restore the independence (from Gloria Arroyo and the Chief Justice himself) of the Supreme Court?

It must be pointed out that the impeachment of Mr. Corona at the behest of President Aquino is a process clearly allowed by the Constitution. The "midnight" appointment is not supported by the Charter but was made legitimate by the Supreme Court.

Chief Justice Corona has the same weapon used by the President. His supporters have the legal right to seek impeachment of the President he cannot get along with.

He has done everything except that. He refuses because he knows he cannot get the votes of the House of Representatives to bring President Aquino to the impeachment court.

In other words, the President made a decision to cause the impeachment of Mr. Corona in a manner that sits with the Constitution and the laws. The guarantee of free expression in the Constitution allows the Chief Justice to stab the President. President Aquino has the same right. PNoy’s exercise of that right is superior to that of Mr. Corona because it is done to protect democracy, the Constitution and to restore the independence of the Judiciary.

The right of free expression being exercised by the Chief Justice is for no other purpose than to try and maintain the partiality of the Court to Mrs. Arroyo. And he calls that a duty to preserve the independence of the Judiciary?

The meaning of the word independence as it applies to the Highest Tribunal seems to have been lost to the mind of the Head Magistrate. On the other hand, the meaning of the same word is getting clearer and clearer to President Aquino.

Mr. Corona has gone too far to support his idea of the "independence" of the Judiciary. But he missed taking the legal step of initiating impeachment proceedings against the President because he knows he will fail.

It should occur to Mr. Corona that nearly the entire membership of the House voted for his impeachment. The 188 votes against him is voice of the people aired by their representatives.

Which voice represents that of the Chief Justice? None but his own and his few supporters.

It is worth noting that only four of the so-called "magic nine" in the Tribunal showed up during the rally the Head Magistrate called in his defense.

He has been deserted by his supporters in his own turf. Why he does not seem to comprehend that indicates the "clarity" of mind and intellect of the Chief Justice.

There are charges that President Aquino wants to control the Tribunal. Let us say there is truth to that. Now, who do you want to control the Court? President Aquino or Gloria Arroyo? The answer must come from the people.