|
You
can’t hide the smell of shit by covering it with a piece
of paper. That is obvious to all except nine associate
justices of the Supreme Court who thought they could do
it.
The
majority decision on the Neri case expanded the doctrine
of executive privilege to cover criminal activity. That,
in and of itself, stank enough, but its provenance made
it smell worse.
Teresita
Leonardo-de Castro wrote the ponencia despite
allegations she was appointed to the Supreme Court as a
reward for convicting former President Joseph Estrada of
plunder. The allegation may or may not be true, but it
is there, so out of delicadeza, she should have
inhibited herself from the Neri case.
Arturo
Brion arrived at the Court after all the proceedings,
except the voting, had been completed—but that did not
stop him from voting in favor of Neri.
Lawyer
Teddy Te said of the two justices: “There is an
unsurprising lack of shame in Brion voting on a petition
where he did not participate and where popular sentiment
held that his appointment was precisely to forestall the
effects of a Velasco inhibition. There is also an
uncharacteristic lack of delicadeza in De Castro
writing for the majority, where her appointment was
clearly seen as a reward for convicting Estrada.” Amen.
There
was a clamor for Presbitero Velasco to recuse himself
because he was reportedly a close friend and golfing
buddy of Neri. He denied they were close, he said they
only played golf once, and then he closed his eyes and
covered his ears.
Leonardo
Quisumbing, although not an Arroyo appointee, has two
members of his family who are. His wife is chairman of
the Commission on Human Rights, courtesy of Gloria
Arroyo. His daughter is executive director with the rank
of undersecretary in the Presidential Human Rights
Committee, the Palace in-house body tasked with
defending the obscene human-rights record of the Arroyo
administration.
Renato
Corona cannot claim Neri is just an acquaintance. He and
Neri were high-school classmates at the Ateneo. In
addition, they were together in Malacañang; Corona as
Palace chief of staff before Gloria appointed him to the
Supreme Court, and Neri as Neda chief before he was
transferred to the Commission on Higher Education for
trying to moderate greed.
Corona’s
association with Neri, without even mentioning the
indiscretion of Mrs. Corona signing a manifesto
supporting Gloria Arroyo, should have been ample reason
for inhibition.
To be
fair, Supreme Court justices are human; their decisions
are neither infallible nor completely free of human
frailties.
“Our
judges,” as Thomas Jefferson said of his country’s
magistrates, “are as honest as other men and not more.
They have the same passions for party, for power and the
privilege of their corps.”
That’s
why it’s vital that those who sit on the bench take
great pains to act with propriety. They must always
appear to be above and beyond reproach.
The
public will bow to the decision of the Court, good or
bad, as long as they believe justices are not capricious
or corrupt.
In our
system of government, the rule of law, the benchmark of
our evolution from savage barbarians to civilized human
beings, is entrusted to the Supreme Court. Consequently,
when the Court fails, the rule of law also fails and we
regress to settling our disputes through brute force.
Philosophers call that sorry state of affairs the
natural condition of mankind, the “state of nature,”
where everyone has a right to everything in the world
and a “war of all against all” rages continuously.
Thomas Hobbes described that existence as “solitary,
poor, nasty, brutish and short.”
Those
five justices with no sense of propriety failed to
uphold the rule of law. They made our world look more
like the poster girl of corruption: she who is nasty,
brutish and short.
Buencamino is a fellow of Action for Economic Reforms (www.aer.ph). |
