I challenge our presidential candidates to bare their stand on the raging legal controversy on whether outgoing President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo can still appoint the next Chief Justice despite a constitutional prohibition against presidential midnight appointments.
Only LP Presidential candidate Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III has taken a firm stand on the controversy while most of the other presidential aspirants have opted to consistently play on the safe side on the matter.
This matter on whether we should allow the President to circumvent the constitutional ban against midnight appointments for her to be able to fiddle with the independence of the Supreme Court is more than just another political debate. The integrity and independence of the judiciary is a matter of paramount concern of every Filipino as this will greatly impact our democratic institutions and our country’s future.
I challenge presidential candidates Gilbert Teodoro Jr. of Lakas-Kampi-CMD, Manuel Villar of Nacionalista Party, Richard Gordon of Bagungbayan, and Joseph Estrada of UNO-PMP to state their stand on whether President Arroyo can still appoint the successor of Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno who will retire on May 17.
Given the importance of this issue to the future of our country, it is critical that those seeking to be president of this country must now state this position on this constitutional issue so that the people will not be left in the dark. It is sad that most of our presidential candidates have opted to take a safe stand on this issue.
If elected to be the country’s next president, Aquino had said he would not recognize a new SC chief justice illegally appointed by President Arroyo.
A number of legal watchdog groups such as the Philippine Bar Association (PBA) have made public statements denouncing what was described as a “brazen” attempt to undermine the Constitution and the country’s institutions. The PBA, a prestigious lawyers’ group, condemned the move by Malacañang and its allies in the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC) to name a new Chief Justice.
The PBA, in a letter to the JBC, urged Puno “to exercise his leadership in this issue and follow through with his moral force campaign to denounce debilitating ills in our society, especially those structures that promote, breed and spawn corruption.”
The controversy started after Quezon City Rep. and JBC member Matias Defensor Jr. has asked the JBC to start the nomination process for the Chief Justice post and to allow President Arroyo to appoint Puno’s successor even before his retirement on May 17 despite a clear ban against midnight appointments.
The Constitution bars the President from appointing a new Chief Justice in the last 90 days of her term. Others argued that Mrs. Arroyo was barred from making appointments two months before the May elections.
The Supreme Court Appointments Watch (SCAW) also called on the JBC to “open up its deliberations on this matter in full view of the public.” In an open letter to the JBC, the SCAW, which includes the Philippine Association of Law Schools Transparency and Accountability Network and other groups, called for open deliberations on the issue.
Moreover, the Cebu chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP) objected to the suggestion of Defensor that the body start the screening process to give Mrs. Arroyo the opportunity to name Puno’s replacement.
The IBP Cebu chapter, in a resolution, said the move “is not only constitutionally impermissible but morally and historically devious because the President as an outgoing president must not appoint a person to a position which has not become legally vacant.
Submit Comment
Follow us on: