Lambino, the Fallout

I wrote elswehere that the Supreme Court's decision in Javellana in 1973 destroyed its reputation and signaled the Court's subservience to the executive branch of government. More than three decades later, the Arroyo administration elevated the their own attempt to revise the Constitution before the Supreme Court. The Court was given an opportunity to reprise its role in 1973 and approve a shift to a parliamentary form of government despite the apparent defects in manner the Constitution is amended.

When the Court deliberated on Lambino, I suggested that a ruling in favor of the initiative would have been politically safe route; it will shield the Court from heat. I predicted that ruling against initiative would open the Court to vilification by the other branches of government.

Indeed, the Speaker of the House aattacked the Supreme Court and went so far as to initiate impeachment proceedings against the Justices who voted against the initiative claiming the Supreme Court destroyed the dreams of millions of Filipinos when it dismissed the Palace-sponsored campaign.

I also predicted that whatever flak the Court will get will be temporary and that when the smoke has cleared, the Court would become stronger. A recent survey by Pulse Asia proved just that. In that survey, Pulse Asia reported that:


The Supreme Court and Chief Justice Panganiban enjoy higher approval and trust ratings in November 2006 relative to the previous quarter At the heels of the Supreme Court’s decision junking the people’s initiative petition of the Sigaw ng Bayan, the performance and trust ratings of both the Supreme Court and its Chief Justice improve between July and November 2006. While the overall approval rating of Chief Justice Panganiban increases by 9 percentage points during this period, that of the Supreme Court goes up from 36% to 46%.

Furthermore, the Chief Justice also registers a 10-percentage point gain in his overall trust rating between July and November 2006. In the case of the Supreme Court, its present overall trust rating (43%) is 9 percentage points higher than the July 2006 figure (34%).

There is a lesson to be learned here. More than three decades ago, the Court took the safe route, preserved its own existence at the cost of its own credibility. For years the Court had had to struggle to rebuild the people's faith in the institution.

By refusing to pay into politicians' games this time the Court gained public respect. This lesson should inspire public servants to resist every temptation to compromise their integrity. It presents the clearest reason for standing by the truth.





Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. City of Lapu-Lapu, et al., G.R. No. 181756, June 15, 2015.

The Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority is an instrumentality of the government; thus, its properties actually, solely and exclusively used for public purposes, consisting of the airport terminal building, airfield, runway, taxiway and the lots on which they are situated, are not subject to real property tax and respondent City is not justified in collecting taxes from petitioner over said properties. [1] MCIAA is vested with corporate powers but it is not a stock or non-stock corporation, which is a necessary condition before an agency or instrumentality is deemed a government-owned or controlled corporation. Like MIAA, petitioner MCIAA has capital under its charter but it is not divided into shares of stock. [2] [1] Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. City of Lapu-Lapu, et al. , G.R. No. 181756, June 15, 2015. [2] Mactan Cebu International Airport Authority v. City of Lapu-Lapu, et al. , G.R. No. 181756, June 15, 2015.
Read more

Alternative to Oposa

I do not mean to suggest that the Philippine Supreme Court has abandoned the environment. Sometimes the solutions to our problems need not be remedies that straddle generations or excite international attention. There is still one alternative that the Supreme Court has preserved: local governments. Local governments in the Philippines are not all allies of the environment. Too many local officials equate economic development with large-scale resource extraction activities such as mining and logging. But when cases reach the Supreme Court, the Court has been remarkably supportive of local governments and community efforts to protect the environment. Two decisions of the Court come to mind. The first is Tano v Socrates (G.R. No. 110249, August 21, 1997). In that case the Supreme Court upheld the power of the local governments to enact laws to protect the environment pursuant to the general welfare clause of the Local Government Code of 1991. The Court pointed out that the Code seeks “to
Read more

Local government avalanche is Congress' fault

A recent Newsbreak report, GMA Creating Too Many LGUs , by Miriam Grace Go (August 22, 2007), unfairly blames President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for the increase in the number of local government units in the Philippines. This increase, particularly in the case of cities has been going on ever since the Local Government Code of 1991 took effect. It is encouraged by two features of the Code: (a) the formula for the distribution of the internal revenue allotment that favors cities, and (b) the relative ease in making cities. Politicians determined to increase the financial resources of their governments have been campaigning to upgrade into cities ever since they discovered these weaknesses in the Code. In 1986, there were 73 provinces, 60 cities, and 1,530 municipalities in the country. Just before the Estrada administration collapsed, there were already 110 cities. On March 5, 2001, less than two months into office, President Arroyo signed 14 bills on the conversion of municipalities i
Read more