E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL
Demolition beyond the Judiciary
Sunday, 08 10, 2008
The Judiciary is regarded as the most credible institution of government, in fact, the only credible institution that remains in the country. Chief Justice Reynato Puno, in the two years he has been at the helm, has instituted reforms like no other. The decisions of the Supreme Court have, in the main, been praised for their even-handedness. Justice and fairness are once more the hallmarks of the Judiciary. Trailblazing remedies within our jurisdiction have been put in place. The Rule of Law has never been true as the rule as it is now: a restatement of what a car mechanic once said: “Those who have less in life should have more in law (and justice).”
In times of great many difficulties, when the political branches of government can hardly deliver to the people what they ought to, the last remaining buoy that keeps the nation afloat is the Judiciary. Lack of food and high prices — the “sleeping dogs of socio-economics,” as a waggish friend describes them — can be left well enough alone for the moment. In fact, this long suffering nation usually manages to sleep on the pangs of hunger and the deprivations of poverty, until the next miracle of subsidy, windfall, dole-out or price rollback comes along.
But try to fool with the workings of justice, and a lot of angry people are not likely going to let sleeping dogs lie (pun unintended). And believe me, in l’affaire GSIS-Meralco, somebody is lying — or telling only half-truths — and Chief Justice Puno must now be really angry as hell!
And wait: While a special committee has been constituted to sort out the outright brazen lies from the half-truths, there yet looms in the background a dramatis personae whose roles are to manipulate the developments in this controversy affecting the Judiciary. We do not know who they are exactly, but it makes sense to speculate on what these players may be up to.
Only the Shadow knows what evil lurks in the hearts of these men. And we don’t mean the Lopezes, the justices and their friends who are embroiled in the l’affaire GSIS-Meralco, or the law firms and lawyers of varying degrees of notoriety. Rather, we refer those who have a bigger stake in the breakdown of the Judiciary, who would profit most from a breakdown.
Cui bono? Who benefits? To whose advantage?
Remember that l’affaire GSIS-Meralco is the highest so far in the judicial hierarchy that an allegation of corruption has reached in recent memory. And take that development in the context of the breakdown in the political branches of government.
We can ride over corruption in the Judiciary, if the Legislature and the Executive are in the good graces of the people. But if the latter two are themselves enmeshed in corruption, and the last bulwark of decency that is the Judiciary has joined the club, there is nowhere else for the people to put their trust in.
The media prominence given to the bribery angle puts the onus on the Judiciary to shore up its trustworthiness before the people. Who else but the Judiciary would resolve the issue pertaining to the events in Mindanao, after Congress and the Executive have lost their will to handle the problematic issue of establishment of a new nation of Muslims in Mindanao? How else would the controversies fanned by investigations in Congress be resolved, except by the parties affected resorting to judicial intervention? And when the serious economic issues, such as imposition and collection of the eVAT, come to a head, where would the people head to but the august halls of the Judiciary?
In a climate of corruption, where a strong likelihood of a decision being catered to the highest bidder, would a litigant not exactly moneyed still have faith in the Judiciary and expect the decision on his case to be just and fair?
Something very controversial, vast in scope and far-reaching in its consequences to the nation, is most likely to occur, and necessarily requires the intervention of the Judiciary for final resolution. It could very well be that issue over the new Muslim nation, which is threatening to become a sovereign state by itself. But in today’s climate of uncertainty, would a scandal-wracked Judiciary deserve to be the final arbiter, or even be considered as one? If the almost certain answer is in the negative, where would the aggrieved person go to, outside of the Judiciary?
Recourse to the Judiciary is always the last resort. If that last resort is already unavailable, on account of lack of trust by the people expected to rely on that last resort, what happens then?
If one were to speculate, could it be that the recklessness of our peace negotiators in ceding a big slice of Philippine territory to our Muslim brothers in the South was deliberate and contrived, designed to shove the nation into uncertain times, while the institution that could finally settle the issue struggles to cleanse itself and leave everything else to be resolved under an emergency situation?
Who stands to benefit from such a situation?
Elections are yet two years away in the constitutional scheme of things. From the speed with which developments in the national scene are pointing to the erosion of trust of the people in the Judiciary thanks to l’affaire GSIS-Meralco and its sub-plots, the elections may not necessarily be held as scheduled.
Start becoming afraid. Be very afraid. Something catastrophic might rend the national fabric, and somebody could end up ruling forever.
No comments:
Post a Comment