http://www.manilatimes.net/index.php/opinion/10677-noynoys-threat
Supreme Court Administrator Jose Midas Marquez has begged off from making a categorical stand on the debate over President Gloria Arroyo’s reported plan to appoint a successor to Chief Justice Reynato Puno.
Marquez was wise to do so. “It would be highly speculative on my part to issue an opinion,” he said at the Kapihan sa Sulo media forum Saturday.
Puno turns 70 on May 17 and would thus be required to retire from the bench.
By tradition, Marquez recalled, the successor to the top judiciary post is installed either a day before or on the day the outgoing chief justice retires.
Only in the case of Marcelo Fernan and Andres Naravasa was the turnover delayed—but by just three days, soon after the former decided to run for vice president in 1992.
In Puno’s case, the question of succession has become an emotionally charged spat—that diverts the public’s focus from more pressing and relevant issues.
The President’s detractors insist that she should no longer be allowed to pack the Supreme Court with appointees. They warn, for instance, that a failure of elections in May could be used by Mrs. Arroyo as an excuse to hang on to the presidency—with the concurrence of the GMA-packed Supreme Court.
Malacañang and its supporters, on the other hand, point out that Mrs. Arroyo’s appointees to the high tribunal have turned out to be quite independent-minded. Some, such as Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, have even gone to the extent of castigating her on a regular basis.
The debate has become so impassioned that at least one presidential candidate, Sen. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino 3rd was led to declare that, should he win in May, he would not recognize the chief justice installed by Mrs. Arroyo.
Noynoy’s declaration was obviously meant to underscore his promise that, as president, he would be the exact opposite of the unpopular Mrs. Arroyo. His tough stance has been applauded by most of his partisans—but not all.
His more thoughtful supporters fear that Noynoy is being set up for an unnecessary, if not downright counterproductive, face-off with the Supreme Court in the aftermath of his increasingly likely victory in May.
They ask: Does a Noynoy presidency need to commence in a confrontation with the highest court of the land?
Noynoy has not only said that he would not recognize a GMA-appointed chief justice. Moreover, he has warned the other magistrates that they risk impeachment if they choose to support such appointment.
The sectors increasingly perturbed by this debate include the business community, where many Noynoy supporters can be found.
The private sector continues to hold on to the hope that a credible political exercise in May would help introduce an era of relative calm to the nation that, in turn, would reassure investors and trigger our much-delayed economic take-off.
Noynoy, however, has thrown the proverbial gauntlet, not only at the Palace but also at the high tribunal.
The bellicose gesture, not a few businessmen fear, foreshadows, not stability and continuity, but further tumult in the political arena.
The current impression is that a President Noynoy would give priority to emptying the Supreme Court of all GMA appointees who affirm the constitutionality of her appointment of a successor to Puno.
That, according to published reports, would be President Noynoy’s first order of business. It could turn out to be just the opening salvo in a long and ugly exchange between two branches of government.
Court observers believe that at least eight of the current crop of associate justices would find the appointment of a chief justice-in-waiting constitutional. In the 14-member tribunal, those eight constitute a thin majority—but a majority nonetheless.
If President Noynoy makes good on his threat to remove the eight magistrates who fail to do his bidding, more trouble is bound to ensue.
Impeaching the eight justices is bound to turn out to be a protracted, tedious and divisive process that would keep President Noynoy fully occupied.
Even if we were to assume that Noynoy’s overwhelming popularity help the Liberal Party and its allies to sweep the races for seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives, it would still not guarantee the automatic impeachment of the eight justices.
A review of recent history should show why this would be so.
The Senate trial of former President Joseph Estrada as well as the several attempts in the House to unseat Mrs. Arroyo give a preview of how challenging the task of impeaching eight justices is likely to become. The lawmakers would be hard put to impeach a magistrate, much less eight, on the mere say-so of President Noynoy.
President Noynoy would have to first cause the Supreme Court to turn on itself. He would have to get enough justices to agree with his opinion that appointment of the chief justice by Mrs. Arroyo violates the Constitution.
Only after he succeeds in getting enough justices to agree with his position could President Noynoy direct his congressional allies to impeach all the magistrates who chose to defy him on the issue.
How long would impeaching eight justices take? Maybe, the entire term of a Noynoy presidency.
Puno turns 70 on May 17 and would thus be required to retire from the bench.
By tradition, Marquez recalled, the successor to the top judiciary post is installed either a day before or on the day the outgoing chief justice retires.
Only in the case of Marcelo Fernan and Andres Naravasa was the turnover delayed—but by just three days, soon after the former decided to run for vice president in 1992.
In Puno’s case, the question of succession has become an emotionally charged spat—that diverts the public’s focus from more pressing and relevant issues.
The President’s detractors insist that she should no longer be allowed to pack the Supreme Court with appointees. They warn, for instance, that a failure of elections in May could be used by Mrs. Arroyo as an excuse to hang on to the presidency—with the concurrence of the GMA-packed Supreme Court.
Malacañang and its supporters, on the other hand, point out that Mrs. Arroyo’s appointees to the high tribunal have turned out to be quite independent-minded. Some, such as Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, have even gone to the extent of castigating her on a regular basis.
The debate has become so impassioned that at least one presidential candidate, Sen. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino 3rd was led to declare that, should he win in May, he would not recognize the chief justice installed by Mrs. Arroyo.
Noynoy’s declaration was obviously meant to underscore his promise that, as president, he would be the exact opposite of the unpopular Mrs. Arroyo. His tough stance has been applauded by most of his partisans—but not all.
His more thoughtful supporters fear that Noynoy is being set up for an unnecessary, if not downright counterproductive, face-off with the Supreme Court in the aftermath of his increasingly likely victory in May.
They ask: Does a Noynoy presidency need to commence in a confrontation with the highest court of the land?
Noynoy has not only said that he would not recognize a GMA-appointed chief justice. Moreover, he has warned the other magistrates that they risk impeachment if they choose to support such appointment.
The sectors increasingly perturbed by this debate include the business community, where many Noynoy supporters can be found.
The private sector continues to hold on to the hope that a credible political exercise in May would help introduce an era of relative calm to the nation that, in turn, would reassure investors and trigger our much-delayed economic take-off.
Noynoy, however, has thrown the proverbial gauntlet, not only at the Palace but also at the high tribunal.
The bellicose gesture, not a few businessmen fear, foreshadows, not stability and continuity, but further tumult in the political arena.
The current impression is that a President Noynoy would give priority to emptying the Supreme Court of all GMA appointees who affirm the constitutionality of her appointment of a successor to Puno.
That, according to published reports, would be President Noynoy’s first order of business. It could turn out to be just the opening salvo in a long and ugly exchange between two branches of government.
Court observers believe that at least eight of the current crop of associate justices would find the appointment of a chief justice-in-waiting constitutional. In the 14-member tribunal, those eight constitute a thin majority—but a majority nonetheless.
If President Noynoy makes good on his threat to remove the eight magistrates who fail to do his bidding, more trouble is bound to ensue.
Impeaching the eight justices is bound to turn out to be a protracted, tedious and divisive process that would keep President Noynoy fully occupied.
Even if we were to assume that Noynoy’s overwhelming popularity help the Liberal Party and its allies to sweep the races for seats in the Senate and the House of Representatives, it would still not guarantee the automatic impeachment of the eight justices.
A review of recent history should show why this would be so.
The Senate trial of former President Joseph Estrada as well as the several attempts in the House to unseat Mrs. Arroyo give a preview of how challenging the task of impeaching eight justices is likely to become. The lawmakers would be hard put to impeach a magistrate, much less eight, on the mere say-so of President Noynoy.
President Noynoy would have to first cause the Supreme Court to turn on itself. He would have to get enough justices to agree with his opinion that appointment of the chief justice by Mrs. Arroyo violates the Constitution.
Only after he succeeds in getting enough justices to agree with his position could President Noynoy direct his congressional allies to impeach all the magistrates who chose to defy him on the issue.
How long would impeaching eight justices take? Maybe, the entire term of a Noynoy presidency.
No comments:
Post a Comment