By RENE SAGUISAG
THE issue remains moral fitness. Is midnight Chief Justice (CJ) Rene Corona morally fit for the post?
It is not mental fitness, an issue raised in the 2010 elections against Noynoy; the people gave him the benefit of the doubt. Doubt? Yes, in that I think towant to be Prez of this arguably ungovernable nation of scofflaws, kadunong and pilosopos, many writing columns, and multiplying like rabbits, is like desiringto get married. Our law teachers would tell us decades ago that insanity, not sanity, is a requirement, ha, ha. The problems the Marcoses and the Arroyos left can drive one crazy.
Seriously, judging on the basis of what is coming out, Rene may think that a non-lying, non-cheating and non-stealing Prez, like PNoy, must be insane. But, heavily damaged goods Rene cannot save himself by changing the subject. Moral fitness, not playground childish taunting or name-calling ad hominems.
Why did Rene rush home in November 2011 to vote for Gloria’s TRO? He must tell us now why he had toleave beloved kin and not wait to watch Manny Pacquiao, just to accommodate GMA’s plan to flee the jurisdiction. Rene must explain now, not in due time, as he keeps talking anyway, not under oath.
The Bureau of Immigration records should validate that Rene was out of the country early last November. (Indeed, we should look at his entire travel record since he became a Justice. Did he also go to watch Manny Pacquiao in 2010? Justices never tell us why they travel at our expense. As to family expense and taxes paid, comply with Sec. 7 of R.A. No. 3019, of Senator Tolentino, of 1960.)
Despite Rene, Hubert Webb was acquitted. One who arranged to meet with litigants, as Rene did with Ka Lauro Vizconde, to spite another Justice, and does not make it of record and does not recuse or inhibit himself, should permanently leave government. Rene having worked for two humongously-moneyed dictators, Macoy and Gloria, should be enough.
Last February 1, a client, from Bataan, was acquitted by the SC. But Zos Mendoza had been acquitted by the Court of Appeals (CA), after having been convicted by the Caloocan Regional Trial Court (RTC). Given the principle of double jeopardy, Zos’ acquittal by the CA should not even have reached the SC. The Aquila Legis case of Lenny Villa started in 1991.
The ponente was Justice Mei Sereno, and her ponencia was concurred in by Justices Tony Carpio, Art Brion, Jose Perez and Bojie Reyes. Good some justices do what they are paid to: decide cases, and not waste time showing gratitude to the CJ and the appointing power, who prized loyalty above merit. Let’s hope that after this is over, we will have another Aquino SC. In Prez Cory’s term, her justices called it as they saw it, disappointing her more than once, as in the sale of Roppongi, Customs reorganization, Comelec acting chairman, etc.; in the case of Macoy’s remains, she barely won, 8-7. That is the kind of SC we need, independent.
PNoy took her oath before an Associate Justice, Chit Carpio. His Mom took hers before Associate Justice Dingdong Teehankee. Talagang anak ng nanay niya.
Is there a rule that anybody can take part in impeachment, except the Prez? The CJ can save all he wants to say in the impeachment trial, under oath, subject to cross-examination; no wonder he wants it stopped by the GMA SC, with every Justice perceived as against him sought to recuse himself or herself.
So, a Let-Me-Call-You-Sweetheart SC? And even the Senate? Mis-Trial. Is she pretty? But things can turn ugly if the unelected SC will nullify the work of the sovereign people (70 percent approval rating for PNoy and -15 percent for Rene) through their duly-elected representatives via a hometown decision.
We deserve better than one whose side claims he is winning but wants the SC to abort his victory. Ignored, his team now cries Miss Trial to rescue him from the Trial of the Century, which arguably has a lesson daily on how not to conduct an impeachment proceeding, maybe because impeachment is outside our experience and the American model is ignored.
Mistrial may apply to 2001 when the prosecutors walked out; they should have been directed to come back on pain of contempt. A befuddled CJ Jun Davide did nothing but instead swore in GMA the next day, instead of acting on the various petitions filed in the SC. The ref joined the other team. Manong Johnny had ruled aught any walkout.
Mistrial is an animal unknown in our legal zoo. Its only known use was in Aquino-Galman, where Macoy was shown to have made the prosecution and the Sandiganbayan go to bed. Lutong Macoy, which the SC thrashed in 1986.
Today the defense warns the Senate, if we lose, we will have Rene’s SC declare a mistrial, a concept in criminal law. But we have yet to be cited an impeachment case, a national inquest, declared a mistrial. Any precedent please. Black’s define mistrial thus: “1. A trial that the judge brings to an end, without a determination of the merits, because of a procedural error or serious misconduct occurring during the proceedings. 2) A trial that ends inconclusively because the jury cannot agree on a verdict.” The word does not even appear in Justice Federico Moreno’s Philippine Law Dictionary. Rara avis indeed. In Galman, “respondents committed serious irregularities constituting mistrial and resulting in miscarriage of justice and gross violation of the constitutional rights of the petitioners and the sovereign people of the Philippines to due process of law.” Manong Johnny would not have any of these even if from time to time I find myself in respectful disagreement with him (such as in his bill-of-attainder warning in impeachment, not legislation).
In the end, the Senators will vote on what they will see to be in their best interests. How many of them and the SC Justices have secret dollar accounts, PAL perks, etc.? Mga dugong bughaw?
No comments:
Post a Comment