 |
 |
| ON THE OTHER HAND |
| President Puno?
By Antonio C. Abaya Written on Jan. 19, 2009 For the Standard Today, January 20 issue Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno has created a lot of waves in recent days because of his call for the emergence of a "moral force" to save the Filipinos from themselves. "It is very obvious that the main problem of the country is moral decadence. This is the root cause of the density of power, corruption problem," he told reporters before speaking before the Anvil business group. (Philippine Daily Inquirer, Jan. 15). "You look at it more deeply. You look at it from its various dimensions. That's why�it's time for the moral forces of the country to manifest themselves. They should cease to be an invisible force. They should play a dominant role in redirecting the destiny of our people. �" Citing the ethical teachings of Confucius, Mr. Puno said "The wisdom of Confucius' answers speak for themselves. More than economic prosperity, more than military might, government needs the trust of the people in order to govern effectively�" He said that the country's two EDSA revolutions "are testament to the lesson that governments that forfeit the trust of the people have unhappy exits.." Mr. Puno said that a leader should be able to lead by his (or her � my insertion. ACA) own example. "There is thus an unbending obligation on the part of those who lead government to provide its moral ballast. A government that is morally fragile cannot withstand the evils that will buffet it. To be sure, a government afflicted with moral leprosy deserves nothing but the graveyard�. "We need leaders with moral character. History tells us that people will forgive leaders for lapses in ability but will not forgive those who slip in character. Character is who we are when no one is watching." It is hard to recall when the last time was that a Filipino public official spoke about morality with the gravitas that Chief Justice Puno's words are pregnant with. And this at a time when moves are afoot to impeach him on a technicality related to a congressional election protest where the aggrieved party is a member of President Gloria Arroyo's Kampi party, the same party that is maneuvering in the Lower House for Charter Change (ChaCha) to switch to the parliamentary system, which would allow President Arroyo to remain in power beyond 2010, as prime minister. Kampi officials deny that the impeachment maneuver and the moves toward parliamentary are related. But it would be hard for them to convince people of that disconnect because as Chief Justice, Mr.Puno stands as an impediment to the tactical need of Kampi to have a constituent assembly (ConAss) in which the Lower House and the oppositionist Senate would sit and vote as one body. In such a ConAss, Kampi and its mercenary allies � numbering much more than the requisite 167 - could and would overwhelm the 23-member Senate. With Mr. Puno remaining as Chief Justice, the Supreme Court would unlikely go along with such a crass maneuver, because Mr. Puno has character: "Character is who we are when no one is watching." When no one is watching, President Arroyo and Kampi bigwigs would be passing around paper bags full of cash. That would be consistent with their true character. Chief Justice Puno, who is a Methodist preacher, has emerged as the very moral force that he wants to move forward from the shadows, to play a "dominant role in redirecting the destiny of our people." There are calls for him to run for president in May 2010, which coincidentally is when he is scheduled to retire from the Supreme Court. Senator Ping Lacson has graciously offered to abandon his own presidential ambitions and give way to Chief Justice Puno if Puno were to choose to run. No word from Noli, Loren, Manny, Mar, Erap, Chiz, Dick and other presidential contenders. Would they also give way to Mr.. Puno? Nandy Pacheco's Ang Kapatiran party, which has only one elected public official: a municipal councilor in Olongapo City, has unrolled its welcome mat for Chief Justice Puno in case Mr. Puno were to choose to run for president. All this is encouraging and gives a glimmer of hope to Filipinos who are despairing that this country can ever climb out of the moral rat hole that it has fallen into. But is it realistic? Is it even desirable? To be a serious presidential candidate by May 2010, Chief Justice Puno will have to resign from the Supreme Court as early as September or October 2009 in order to build a party machinery, alone or in tandem with an existing party, in time for the campaign, which officially begins in January or February 2010. That would leave the Supreme Court without his physical presence and moral influence for eight months. Eight months during which the malevolent geniuses in Malacanang, the inner Cabinet and Kampi leadership would be free to appoint a new Chief Justice sympathetic to President Arroyo's ambition to remain in power beyond 2010. With a friendlier Chief Justice in the Supreme Court, Kampi would likely go full blast for a constituent assembly to railroad charter changes that would either extend President Arroyo's presidential term or shift to parliamentary, fully confident that a Puno-less Supreme Court would rule in favor of the Lower House and Senate voting as one body. Mr.Puno is probably aware of the trap that his admirers and supporters are unwittingly and unthinkingly laying out for him. Which may be why he has turned down all such overtures, saying he will consult his advisers, referring to his three grandchildren. Aside from the risks of a premature resignation from the Supreme Court, there is also the practical realities of electoral politics in this country, which have been corrupted, perhaps beyond repair, by the likes of Benjamin Abalos and Virgilio Garcillano. Up to now, the Comelec hasn't been able to arrest its own factotum, Lintang Bedol, for unexplained disappearance of documents in the 2007 elections. And up to now, the Comelec cannot guarantee automated elections in 2010; this automation has been under discussion since the 1980s.. I am therefore pessimistic that as presidential candidate Mr. Puno can win in 2010. The stakes are just too high for the incumbent trapos and political dynasts in Malacanang and the Lower House to willingly give up their power and their perks to someone who, in thei virwr, is just one na�ve peddler of old-fashioned morality. I would prefer to see Mr.Puno named head of a revolutionary government - like the one led by President Cory Aquino in 1986 - which will govern this morally challenged country for a transition period of at least three years, with the consent and participation of key sectors of society: the military, the business and professional communities, the non-Communist labor unions, the Churches, the NGO organizations, the overseas workers, the students, etc.. I have been advocating this revolutionary government since 2002. More than a year ago. I was told by those who claimed to be in the know, that such an overture was in fact made to Mr. Puno. I was told that he did not say Yes, but that he did not say No either. ***** Reactions to [email protected]. Other articles in www.tapatt.org and in acabaya.blogspot.com. To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to "President Puno?" 'Reality Check on CJ Puno' Hi Mang Tony, Hopefully all of these will be solved when we support SC Chief Justice Puno in 2010. But we will let him retire first afterwhich we will declare our unanimous support. Whether he likes it or not, the people will elect him... and then he will like it. Now we found our own Obama. Our new hope. One senator said that he may not know yet about politics, but isn't it easier when he already won the people even before he tries to win them. Edel Anit, (by email), Jan. 19, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Why are Filipinos not revolting yet? Tony, How difficult it must be for the Philippine PDEA to work with a Justice Secretary who does not know the Constitution, citing that Marcelino should not be working in PDEA, and a Prosecutor who says "I am lifting the morals (meaning, I guess, the morale) of my people" because they feel bad about the insinuation that they took bribes in rushing to dismiss the drug bust case. Actually, he should stick to his mispronounciation. I see too that the Senator (Trillanes) who complained against corruption in the Military and the Government is still in jail, and the Governor-priest who asked for an identity of the bribe-giver in Malacanan Palace now gets harangued and trapped in his office by wasteful rallies against his clean "no tong" administration. Meantime, the guilty ones roam free. Why are the Filipino people not revolting yet, at this daily injustice? Cita Y. Abad-Dinglasan, (by email), Jan. 20, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya, I wrote this letter earlier in reaction to the Inquirer editorial of January 20, 2009, "Know nothing." If you would allow I would like this letter an "RX to your "President Puno," article. Ramon Mayuga, (by email), Essen, Germany, Jan. 21, 2009 We would like to extend our appreciation of your editorial under the heading, "Know nothing," (PDI, January 20, 2009). As always its citing of the wisdom of the great philosophers of old is very educational and enriching. We are very much in agreement with your criticism of that "illustrious" presidential legal adviser Sergio Apostol who was quoted as saying that Chief Justice Reynato Puno "does not know his politics," and "is not bankable enough," being his reaction to the wishes of the growing many who wanted the chief justice to run for president in 2010. In fact our hopes for the betterment of our lot springs eternally from its few remaining bastions that are seemingly becoming rare if not totally extinct. Chief Justice Puno is one of the sources of our flickering hope. We now see Apostol earning his bread as the devil's advocate, who defines politics as it is traditionally practiced such as the art of making anything, fair or foul possible and imposing the belief that might is right, whether or not such are anchored on moral grounds. In Apostol's opinion, the desire of those who wanted the chief justice be president would not succeed because Puno does not know traditional politics and that he is not bankable enough. Surely those who would be willing to part with a few millions to bribe or buy favors would not be welcome in a Puno administration , thus discouraging them to bankroll a Puno presidential campaign. "The moral flabbiness born of the exclusive worship of the bitch-goddess SUCCESS. That -- " to quote William James in his letter to H. G. WElls, "with the squalid cash interpretation put on word success -- is our national disease." Chief Justice Puno's call on religious leaders "to step forward and act as moral forces in redirecting the destiny of the country ... suffering from moral decadence," is also a call on all of us to help in curing the ills our society is inflicted with. Puno fits the definition laid down by James - "The concrete man has but one interest -- to be right." And being right means facing up to the forces of those who are on the side of wrong. As Chief Justice, Puno represents and embodies the kind of justice that seeks to protect the interests of the nation and its people, not the kind of justice Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez upholds which seeks to protect the interests of his mistress and masters of this present maladministration. If Chief Justice Puno would one day be president of our country and people, we believe that he could help us realize our belief that "Government is, or ought to be instituted for the common benefit, protection, and security of the people, nation, or community; of all various modes and forms of government, that is best which is capable of producing the greatest degree of happiness and safety, and is most effectually secured against the danger of maladministration," as proclaimed by American patriot and statesman George Mason. We are not certain if the presidential elections in 2010 will be held at all as the machinery of the present dispensation has been busy churning the engines of charter change that would best suit their ambitions. If at all, we are not sure if the next president has the requisite "traits of leadership as integrity, honesty, dedication and patriotism," like you stated in your editorial, to redeem this country out of morass of moral bankrputcy this benighted land has so deeply sunk in. While we all pray on the gods to save us from the devils that surround us we must also lend a hand to free us from their evil grip. Ramon Mayuga wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: At first blush, the idea of Supreme Court Chief Justice Puno running for President sounds very good. On closer examination, however, the idea (as you so clearly point out) could turn out to be a trap because Chief Justice Puno will need to resign from the Supreme court at least eight months before the election for the purpose of setting up his own political apparatus. In the event, the moment Mr.Puno resigns, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo can be expected to replace him with somebody who will be beholden to her. It will then be possible for her and her supporters to go ahead with the holding of a Con-Ass for the devious purpose of changing the form of government from Presidential to Parliamentary. Expectedly, GMA will easily come out as the Prime Minister of a new government. Her stratagem to perpetuate herself in power beyond 2010 will then have proved successful. The better alternative, as you suggest, is a Revolutionary Government with Chief Justice Puno at the head. While the idea likewise sounds good at first blush, there is a very real risk that the country will go through paroxysms of violence. If this is what happens, then the reality of a Revolutionary Government will very likely be a pyrrhic victory for the Filipino people. The cost would simply be too much! On these premises, the Filipino people are faced with a daunting conundrum. As the cliche goes, they are caught between a rock and a hard place. Mariano Patalinjug, (by email), Yonkers, NY, Jan. 21, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, No one in his right mind will ever believe for any moment that a super honest president, including the Pope of Rome as Philippine President, can ever stop graft committed by many "Honorables(?)" in the entire Philippine archipelago. It is just simply impossible. All those wanabees in their respective parties are only waiting in the wings to have the chance to control justice to protect themselves as they enrich themselves in public office.. Marlowe Camello, (by email), Homeland, CA, Jan. 21, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Amigo Tony, All this morality talk of igniting to institute moral force in the Philippines being ballyhooed by judge Puno is laughable and ridiculous to some extent. Every Filipino writer has one time or another written about it and has gotten no where. It can only work if the citizenry wants it. And from outside of the box looking in no one leader is equipped with exemplary moral character except Gov. Panlilio of Pampanga. Does Puno think this will open the gate towards presidency? Is he aware of the dubious characters waiting in the wings? There is cartoon character and pea-brain Castro, Loads of makeup Loren and corrupt and crappy Erap! What kind of people will vote for them, much less consider them to rule? No wonder the country is screwed up beyond repair because Filipinos keep voting imbecile and morally bankrupt characters into office to run the country. Will you folks ever learn? The Filipino people should consider the role of GREATNESS in their life and going about living. I don't think COLLECTIVELY Filipinos have ever considered harnessing and seizing entitlement to greatness. Why? I believe it is self doubt and inferiority complex influenced by colonial mentality . To be great, aggressive and progressive are contrary to our culture of espousing humility, being subservient and respectful of age and religion of goodness. To aspire for greatness, self- discipline and exercise of strong moral compass are embedded in one self. However, sadly Pinoys are gullible to a fault because their egos are easily manipulated and victimized. They are also easily swayed by anything that sparkles, which is not necessarily gold. Hopes and aspirations for good leadership is like mining for gold. The test for the content of character and greatness can be illusive. But then again we have produced a Jose Rizal, Bonifacio, Magsaysay and even a Manny Pacquio. The possibility is all there. We continue to buy time. All the best, Oscar Apostol, (by email), Rocklin, CA.,Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, If he runs, I will campaign in my own little way for Chief Justice Puno. We do not need a revolutionary government with a morally strong leader. Forget about the revolutionary government. Col Hector (Tarzan) Tarrazona (Retired), (by email), Jan. 22, 2009 � Original member of the 11-man Ad Hoc Steering Committee of the Reform the AFP Movement in 1985-86 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Tony Abaya, I enjoyed reading your column on Chief Justice Puno, and your citing the Inquirer front-page reports plus TV news about his speech before the Anvil Business Club. I am Chairman of Anvil and we invited him in order to publicly manifest our strong support for this good and honest government official. He spoke about the ideas of Confucius on good governance, because one of our objectives at Anvil is to promote Confucian moral values. Can we invite you and your other friends plus your readers to be our guests on the first day of Chinese Lunar New Year---January 26 Monday in the Gregorian calendar---9am at the Chinese Garden of Rizal Park (behind Rizal Monument, to the left), because Anvil Business Club shall formally donate and unveil Confucius monument to honor all teachers and to promote Confucian values. Attire barong Tagalog or formal. Refreshments shall be served too. Thanks for your very interesting, enlightening and very sensible columns! Warmest best regards Wilson Lee Flores, (by email), Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww You wrote: "Mr.Puno is probably aware of the trap that his admirers and supporters are unwittingly and unthinkingly laying out for him. Which may be why he has turned down all such overtures, saying he will consult his advisers, referring to his three grandchildren." Mr. Abaya, this is one reason I admire men [grudgingly, I must admit :] more than women. They are able, more quickly, to see through certain movements and issues. Which is to say, YOU at once thought of this 'trap' or ploy for which, thankfully, the Chief Justice did not fall for. At present, we will not yet know whether the CJ is aware of the trap or not. Probably. Probably not. Perhaps he just wanted to hold on to his Chief Justice-ship, which, for a lawyer, is the highest attainment one could ever aspire for. Compared to the Executive or the Legislative branches, the Judiciary is the closest to the Highest Moral Good. Perhaps the CJ just didn't want to besmirch his pristine reputation by wading into the murky waters of politics. Anyway, it's heartening that almost everyone has come out in support of the CJ remaining in the Supreme Court. For me, this is proof enough that most Filipinos are basically good people, who just haven't had the luck of being governed by Many Good Men. But so far, I can't quite agree with you all the way regarding the concept of a Revolutionary Government. You cite Cory's Revolutionary Government as an example and a precedent. However, the next time around we may not be that lucky to come off unscathed. Ethel, [email protected], Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww YES - TO A REVOLUTIONARY GOVERNMENT LED BY CHIEF JUSTICE PUNO. Considering the 'Twist & Turns' in your arguments, there seems no other way out for the Filipino to save himself from the Evils of Society confronting him today. Convince CJ Puno to lead us and we will follow. A Concerned Citizen Jose Regino, (by email), Zamboanga City Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Mr. Abaya, If CJ Puno retires early in preparation for his candidacy and Gloria and Kampi went ahead with their Chacha, then it will be EDSA 3 with people again prevailing behind CJ Puno. Eventually it will still be a revolutionary government headed by CJ Puno until an election happens. But I'm afraid that it will be bloody for reasons we all know... it's Gloria's character. Edel Anit, (by emaik), Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony: Chief Justice Puno is best where he is now. He cannot win as President in an election. And as part of a revolutionary triumvirate (with Danny Lim and Erap as proposed by our friend Ding Lichauco), Puno may hold back decision-making given a lifelong habit of a jurist who must air all arguments before taking action. I think that the issue of who will lead will resolve itself after a revolution sweeps out the current criminal syndicate posing as a national government. What people should focus on is how to effect the house-cleaning - and it must be massive, swift and decisive. There has to be a big simplication: all thieves and politicians must be punished, especially those "who rule through corruption and deceit and silence dissent." That last phrase from Obama seems to have been written personally for someone we all know. So let Puno be where he is. The chips will fall where they will. It's closer than anyone thinks. Tito Osias, (by email), Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I believe as you and many do, that Mr Puno could be our Barack. But would our government and political systems, (which have been operating on the basis of greed and its cohorts for the longest time) allow an honest soul to demolish their machines? We need a soul and a heart of a Puno, but would he last long? Would he be able to finish his crusade? I am reminded of a phrase that goes, "the good die young".. Mr Puno could go this way if he succeeds in becoming President. His term could be cut in an instant. Having said that, I have hope and trust that this time around, our good God will hear our pleadings and let Puno start the long and thankless job of restructuring the moral fiber of this battered country of ours. Ed Valenciano, (by email), Jan. 23, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww I am somewhat confused or concerned when the head of the judiciary branch had stated that it is not the legal system that could solve the country's problems but the moral system. I thought all along that legal system and moral fiber go hand in hand in an ideal society. Also, I thought the breakdown of nation's government institution was due to unequal implementation of the law (the poor and the rich issue) or the supremacy of pakikisama or kamag-anak connection over the system of government. I guess the lady justice should now hear and witness legal suits without the blindfold so she could see who is playing joke on her. I admire the Chief Justice sense of justice as manifested by his stands on many contentious or ticklish issues. He could be a good president. But he said he is not interested. Maybe, the people trying to persuade him to run should look around for a suitable candidate in the mold of CJ Puno. Why not try the group of the Kapatiran or Kaya Natin movement if they are sincere in their morality crusade. Their number may compensate for the lack of popularity of the potential candidate from the said movements. I define morality as a character or a trait over and above of someone's call of duty or contractual obligations. Meaning, having morale sense is working extra hours without compensation nor an eye to a promotion. On this concept, could I ask the Chief Justice what he is doing or intent of doing, without a budget to speak of, on the backlog now currently preventing the smooth operation of the judiciary branch of the government, his realm of responsibility. At this critical stage of the ballgame, everybody should walk the talk. Arcy F. Sibal, (by email), Sta. Maria, Bulacan, Jan 23, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Hi Tony, But how are we going to do that revolutionary government? Do we have to do another Edsa? If so, would CJ Puno willing to lead? I do not think this is doable as the opposition and civil society are silent on this. Thanks and more power. Bert Celera, (by email), Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, I read your article with much interest and if understand it right, you are suggesting in your second to the last paragraph that the country need another people power to place Justice Puno on the helm. I like the idea, but how does one get a nation wallowing in poverty, jaded and disillusioned rise up to another people power. The challenge of Chief Justice Puno for "the moral forces of the country to manifest themselves. They should cease to be an invisible force, they should play a dominant role in redirecting the destiny of our people", so far hasn't receive a favorable reaction from the people. "To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist". This very statement of President Obama was downplayed by Malacanang. So Tony, what do we do? The halls of Congress are full of people ready and willing to sell their souls to the highest bidder. The military and police are tainted with officers defending the rich and famous. And even the courts it seem are already starting to decay. Perhaps the answer lies in the age old tradition of our farmers, the "kaingin", slash and burn the old growth to give way for the new. I am looking for an answer or a leader I could follow. If you know one, let me know who so I may support him/her. J. Valdes, (by email), Jan. 22, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, This is the most brilliant piece that you have sent me! You are now the "crystal ball" of Filipino Society. Today, you are making the difference. I can't imagine if you are not around today. My best for you, Sir Tony. Regards, Ernie R. Gonzales, Ph.D, (by email), Jan. 23, 2009 (Research Fellow, London School of Economics) Currently, Chair-Economics, National Research Council of the Philippines wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Tony, C.J. Puno is such a good man and should stay where he is, a clean and happy life, not rich but OK Mike M. Moreno, (by email), Richmond, BC, Canada, Jan. 23, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Puno an alternative to Arroyo Since Gloria M. Arroyo reneged on her promise not to run for the Presidency in the 2004 election, the state of the nation turned for the worse. GMA's politics was so graft-ridden and unrestrainedly corrupt and abusive, to the detriment of the national interest and wellbeing of the people. However, she remains strong, thanks to a disunited opposition and failed military-related standoffs. But destabilization will continue unabated for as long as GMA impedes the processes that will unravel and know the truth about her legitimacy, the manner of her governance, and the many issues imputed against her. The only constitutionally organized institution left to stabilize the country and lead a peaceful and orderly change is the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. How to change. Traditional politicians shall lay off for the meantime and let the Chief Justice act and do justice to the people's cause. This is an option for non-violent action for the Chief Justice to lead a revolutionary transition to a new constitutional system of government. In form and substance, the Chief Justice, though not sinless, is still the more credible institution than the executive and legislative institutions of government or any other institution of the civil society. What form of change. As a public service organization, the caretaker government may function as a corporate entity with personalities of proven integrity and probity constituted as the Board of Directors and the Chief Justice as Chairman/CEO, a reorganized Cabinet headed by a non-political COO as the corporation officers, and the LGUs organized as corporate subsidiaries except that LGU elected officials related within the 4th civil degree of consanguinity or affinity and serving within the same political constituency be considered resigned and replaced as the Transition Government may direct. How is this going to happen. With the support of leaders of the different civil society and professional and business groups, the uniformed establishments of the active and retired list, the Chief Justice shall lead the transition to a new constitutional order on behalf of the million Filipinos that expressed their desire for a change in governance. The AFP and the PNP shall insure that the transition is peaceful and orderly, and, conscious of their apolitical and protector role, provide a secure climate for an authoritative governance of the transition government. The offices of the President, Vice President, and Congress shall be suspended for the duration of the transition to give the transition government a chance to perform so that when the new constitutional order is ratified they can submit themselves to the people again. Transitory measures. The transition is intended to reform present institutions of governance and clean the ills of the traditionally corrupt political system in a timeline of two to three years. A Constitutional Commission shall be constituted with Philconsa providing the core of constitutionalists to draft a new constitution for the ratification of the people within the timeline period. An independent Court of Inquiry shall be constituted to take over the Congressional investigations and facilitate the inquiries on the election fraud of 2004 and other issues imputed against President Arroyo. Government personnel involved in the issues under investigation shall be suspended until cleared. Backsliders shall promptly be dealt with the full force of revolutionary laws. The major actors in the Transition Government shall not be eligible for candidacy in the initial election for the new Constitutional Government. Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Fortunato U. Abat, (by email), Jan. 23, 2009 Former Defense Secretary, former Philippine Ambassador to China wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, I completely agree with your assessment and your proposal to make Chief Justice Puno be the head of a revolutionary government instead of running for President. Like you, I feel that the next election in 2010 would be so corrupted and manipulated that despite the obvious unpopularity of our present leaders, they will "win" and retain control of government. So, putting our collective hope on the coming election could be just an addition to the frustration and anger of our people who are losing patience and could lead to a violent revolution that we do not want to happen. Therefore, instead of spending our time, talent and treasure preparing for the 2010 election, we need to spend them on how to implement a revolutionary government. However, what I am wondering is how we can have a revolution without bloodshed. Most Filipinos have no appetite for a violent or bloody revolution. We need an innovative, practical and effective PEOPLE POWER different in scope and strategy than the previous ones. I hope that your article will prompt us to devise means and ways to utilize the power of the people. Bart Saucelo, MD, (by email), South Bend, Indiana, Jan. 23, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Mr. Abaya: I am from Seattle, Washington. As a Pilipino, I would like to have the change like Pres. Obama started in the United States. Perhaps, we can start the ball rolling, lets start the grass root campaign " Puno for President". The Filipinos in America would surely like to see the change in our beloved county. Please count me in. I will forward your articles to all Filipinos I know in US. Peter M. Mendoza, (by email), Seattle, Washington, Jan. 24, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww The Moral Values have really gone down the drain. The only way to save our nation and the next generation is to force out Gloria Arroyo whose immoral acts have triggered a chain reaction which is aggravating every second, every minute, every hour, every day that she's in that powerful office and to form a civilian caretaker government composed of CJ Puno, and representatives from the academe, business, religious, military sectors. A national election can follow after a total revamp of the Comelec, AFP and PNP. Narciso Ner, (by email), Davao City, Jan. 25, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Many voices have advocated revolution or a revolutionary movement in the Philippines at different points in its history. The present voices refer to people power (is it 4 or 5, lost count) or some other kind of armed revolution. Been there done that, with a more corrupt government emerging each time. Is it hopeless? Surely not. But surely a different kind of revolution is needed. Something deeper and from within, more substantial, better planned, less talked about and done with pureness of intentions. A religious revolution, prayer or flower power? Maybe? What is sure is that right now nobody really knows. [email protected],. Jan. 26, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww CJ Puno Supporters Should Rethink Puno Presidency PUNO TRACK RECORD AS MARTIAL LAW DEFENDER CITED Civic and religious leaders planning to install Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato S. Puno to the presidency in 2010 ought to rethink their political strategy because the track record of Puno as the defender of the martial law regime of the late President Ferdinand Marcos will haunt him in the campaign trail. This was the revelation made by Louis "Barok" Biraogo, the public interest advocate who is accusing the Chief Justice of committing an irregularity in the resolution of an election case involving Negros Oriental solon Jocelyn Sy Limkaichong. "It seems that people have forgotten that Chief Justice Puno was the assistant solicitor general who defended the excesses of the authoritarian regime of President Marcos," Biraogo said in a symposium in Quezon City organized by student groups. "We must never forget that awful chapter in Philippine history when human rights were sacrificed at the altar of national security. We must never forgive the government lawyers like Puno who defended the dictatorship," Biraogo added. The Marcos dictatorship lasted from the time martial law was proclaimed in September 1972 until the ouster of the late strongman in February 1986 in the aftermath of the EDSA Revolution. During that period, then Solicitor General Estelito Mendoza and Assistant Solicitor General succeeded in defending the excesses of the totalitarian dispensation before the Supreme Court. As a consequence, the press and the media were subjected to strict censorship, curfew hours were imposed, warrantless arrests were in effect, secret presidential decrees were enforced, freedom of travel was restricted, and the courts were powerless to release political prisoners and other perceived enemies of the state without the permission of Malaca�ang. These excesses led to public discontentment which paved the way for the overthrow of strongman rule. "How can Chief Justice Puno, a leading supporter of the abusive Marcos dictatorship, respect a regime of freedom and human rights if and when he becomes President?" Biraogo inquired. "It will be martial law and authoritarianism all over again," Biraogo added. In February 2008, Biraogo filed a petition in the Supreme Court to question the disbursement of public funds to pay the salary of Negros Oriental representative Jocelyn Sy Limkaichong whom the Commission on Elections said is an alien. In December last year, Biraogo announced in a press conference that a decision in his favor was unanimously approved by the Supreme Court on July 15, 2008 and that all 14 Associate Justices of the Court had already signed the same but Chief Justice Puno refused to release the decision to the public for less than proper reasons. Louis Barok Biraogo, (by email), Jan. 26, 2009 Wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww Dear Tony, Presideht Puno? Why not, no one from outside theexisting government can be worse than what is now. It does not matter he or she iscorrupt or not, o one out of the recent administration would be able to make any real changes. There are too many allegations and blames which could be brought to investiogation ifthe concerned people are not in power and have no more political immunity. Anyone who does not want GMA again or one of her favorites has not much choices. Forget the opposition, there is also not much chance even maybe Erap would run again and all his former voters would vote for him again. The opposition will never really unite behind one possible winner, there will be candidates like Lacson 2004 who would have no chance but take votes away from the one who would have the chance to win. In addition, with moves of GMA like to put the control of ballot printing under a General who has been tagged as helping to cheat during the last election, minimizes the chance of any fair and correct election, automated or not. Besides, who will check the programs which should count votes that there is not a built-in dagdag bawas? Automated and computerized does not mean there is no more cheating possible, rather contrary. Lastly, there is also only a small chance that GMA and her generals would really accept losing the election. G. Almantos, (by email), Germany, Jan. 26, 2009 wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww (Forwarded to Tapatt by Aurora Pijuan) Newsbreak wrote this story in December 2007. I think we all need this reminder. Out of the Chambers: Reality Check on CJ Puno Chief Justice Reynato Puno did not inhibit himself from cases involving his close friends Estelito Mendoza, Ramon Ang, and Harry Angping. He even penned decisions in their favor. But Puno wants to win in the court of public opinion. by Marites Da�guilan Vitug One early morning in March this year, Reynato Puno rushed from his Fairview home in Quezon City to a court where a life-and-death drama had been taking place. At the other end of the city, in the Taguig Hall of Justice, a former movie stuntman, armed with a pistol and grenade, took four people hostage and demanded millions of pesos in ransom. Erratic and volatile, Almario Villegas, the hostage taker, was party to a land dispute and, apparently irked by the refusal of the complainant's lawyer to agree to a postponement of the hearing, went berserk. The police eventually killed him, ending the 24-hour courtroom drama. The hostages, including two court employees, were unscathed. The appearance of a Chief Justice in a crime scene is a novelty in the Philippine judiciary. Then new to the post�Puno was appointed Supreme Court head in December 2006�he signaled a different tack he would be taking. He was getting out of the chambers, making himself visible. After more than 20 years in the judiciary, 14 of them in the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice was now outside anyone's shadow. In the early part of his career, he worked under Estelito Mendoza, who was then solicitor general and later justice minister of President Marcos. Many consider Puno a prot�g� of Mendoza. The Taguig hostage crisis was only one of several high-profile public appearances of the Chief Justice. A few months later, during the 106th anniversary of the Supreme Court in June, he led employees in an outreach program in a Tondo community, painted a Gawad Kalinga house, and joined children in a birthday party. He lost no time in pounding the speaking circuit, giving at least three speeches a month to various groups including an association of thrift bankers and Pampango journalists. In finely crafted speeches rich in history, the Chief Justice said all the correct things: he extolled the virtues of press freedom and the protection of human rights, criticized the war on terror for allowing legal shortcuts, took jabs at a government that was "hobbled by corruption, struggling with credibility," and warned against "fraudulent and manipulated" elections. In parallel moves, he visited news organizations like the Inquirer and Manila Times, and opened the door for interviews. The walls of his conference room in the Supreme Court are adorned with framed magazine covers and news clips on him. The high point came in July when Puno made history by appearing on national TV for an interview and hosting a summit to find solutions to extrajudicial killings participated in by other branches of government as well as private sector representatives. Both were firsts in the annals of the Court. Seeing a weak executive and an unresponsive Congress and faced with a problem that had reached crisis proportions, Puno responded by calling the summit. While the summit was generally well received, it raised questions on the true role of the Supreme Court for it was an extraordinary event, one that leaped outside the world of the judiciary. The core of the judiciary's work lies in the decisions of its judges and justices. Thus, while the judiciary is considered to have the weakest muscle among the government branches�because it does not enjoy power over the purse nor does it have arms�it fights battles through its decisions, giving order to society. But Puno chose to go outside the courtroom to navigate his way to the public's consciousness. At that time, he was recovering from bruising criticisms because of his pro-people's initiative vote, an administration move meant to perpetuate President Arroyo in office�and one that divided the country. Human Rights Test Cases? "The summit raised expectations," former Senator Jovito Salonga said in an interview. "The Supreme Court could flex its muscle by deciding on [human rights] cases." Others agree. Arno Sanidad, lawyer of the Kuratong Baleleng families, says the killing of the Kuratong Baleleng members could be a test case for Puno. "It could be his defining moment in terms of human rights." We asked the Chief Justice if he would consider the Kuratong Baleleng an example of an extrajudicial killing. He said yes. The case has to do with the alleged rubout of Kuratong Baleleng gang members supposedly ordered by Sen. Panfilo Lacson in 1995, when he was with the Philippine National Police. In 2003, the Supreme Court ordered the reopening of the case. Voting 8-4, the High Court ruled that the case be remanded to the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City. The Supreme Court asserted that the prescribed period with which the case could be reopened has not yet lapsed. Puno dissented. The Kuratong Baleleng case is now pending with the Supreme Court after the QC RTC junked the charges against Lacson and others for lack of probable cause. This may put Puno in an awkward situation, however. He voted against reopening the case and framed his decision within the context of a speedy trial. At the time of the summit, the disappearance of activist Jonas Burgos was the most urgent human rights case pending before the Supreme Court. Edita, Jonas's mother, had filed a habeas corpus petition with the High Court. Some insiders were expecting Puno to take up the Burgos case to test the command responsibility doctrine which was a highlight of discussions during the summit. Instead, Puno passed on the case to the Court of Appeals. But the Court, under Puno's watch, exercised its rule-making power and issued the writ of amparo which seeks to protect the rights of those whose lives are under threat. "The rule-making of the Court is inherent but it is used only now in the area of constitutional rights," Justice Adolfo Azcuna explains. Silent on 1017 Ramon AngMonths before he became Chief Justice, however, Puno was quiet on a burning civil liberties issue, the constitutionality of President Arroyo's order declaring a state of emergency or Presidential Proclamation 1017. In early 2006, as the country celebrated the 20th year of EDSA 1, the police arrested protesters without warrants and raided the Daily Tribune office, among others. Various groups thus filed petitions with the Supreme Court (Randolf David vs. President Arroyo)�and these were partly granted. In a 10-4 vote (with Puno on leave), the Court, in May 2006, declared PP1017 constitutional but the provisions commanding the Armed Forces to enforce laws not related to lawless violence as unconstitutional. Motions for reconsideration were filed but the Court, in June 2006, denied these. According to the book In Defense of Liberty: The Supreme Court Speaks, published by the Supreme Court Public Information Office, "The Court said that the basic issues raised in the motions have already been passed upon its decision and that no substantial agreements had been presented to warrant the decision's reversal," Puno, who was already back from leave, took no part. Court observers say he was cautious because of his pending appointment by the President as Chief Justice. Some say that Puno's taking no part in a landmark decision such as on PP 1017 is quite uncharacteristic, citing his participation in the Fernando Poe citizenship case even if he was on leave. In March 2004, the Court allowed Poe to run for president, dismissing a petition questioning his citizenship. Puno, although on leave, was allowed to vote. He was abroad then and he not only voted with the majority; he even wrote a lengthy separate opinion (34 pages). "The Court must be above politics for in the temples of justice, we do not follow any political god," he eloquently wrote. Estelito Mendoza was counsel for Poe. Defender of Martial Law Before he led the Supreme Court, Puno admits that he was an unknown figure. "Many sectors were complaining about my invisibility," he said in an interview. "A large segment of the public cannot recognize me or do not have an opinion of me�Then came this problem of extrajudicial killings and I really took quite an aggressive stance." Puno's adherence to civil rights is a U-turn, a complete departure from what he stood for when he worked with Mendoza, then Solicitor General, during the martial law years. Together with Mendoza, he appeared before the Supreme Court in the '70s, representing the Marcos government. He defended the 1973 Constitution which paved the way for the extension of the term of President Ferdinand Marcos and justified his rule by force and decree. Puno stayed for 11 years in the Solicitor General's office, from 1971 to 1982, where, at times, he was named Acting Solicitor General in Mendoza's absence. He then joined Mendoza at the Ministry of Justice in 1984 where he was the deputy Minister of Justice, and occasionally the Acting Minister of Justice. EDSA 1 cut short his career in the executive branch. "He was one of the bright legal minds of Marcos," says businessman Harry Angping, a close friend of Puno. "But he was low-key." During Puno's time at the Solicitor General's office and the Ministry of Justice, jails swelled with political detainees, a record number of disappearances was reported, and the press was censored. Asked how he reconciles his work then with his advocacy for human rights today, Puno explains: "I don't see any kind of inconsistency. As a solicitor, it is my job to defend the cases of government as best as I could. I go to another branch of government, the judiciary, and I perform the role of a judge or justice." Ties to Mendoza Estelito MendozaIt is hard to dissociate Puno from his past, especially his ties to Mendoza. He was one of Mendoza's students at the University of the Philippines College of Law. "He has a good mind, he's analytical, has a good knowledge of the law, and he writes fast," Mendoza says. Asked how their mentor-student relationship affects work, Mendoza replies: "Once in the court, the judge (or justice) is my boss. I defer to them." Despite their closeness, Puno has not inhibited himself from cases that Mendoza handles. Asked why, he replied: "When I joined the Court, I asked the justices if I should inhibit (myself from the) cases of Estelito Mendoza. There was a perception that we worked together for a length of time and that I would not be able to decide cases with impartiality. They (justices) asked me not to." Lawyers we talked to say Puno should have inhibited himself. A senior lawyer who knows the Supreme Court well said, "Inhibition, unless mandatory because of relationship by blood or affinity or because of prior action, is a matter of delicadeza addressed to the sound discretion of the justice himself." Once, Puno even penned the decision on a case where at issue was Mendoza's ethical conduct as a lawyer. Based on the account of Justice Artemio Panganiban in his 2005 book Judicial Renaissance, the case stemmed from a motion by the Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) to disqualify Mendoza from representing Lucio Tan and several other respondents in cases involving the sequestration of certain properties by the PCGG. The motion to disqualify him invoked a rule of the Code of Professional Responsibility which says that "a lawyer shall not, after leaving government service, accept engagement or employment in connection with any matter in which he had intervened while in said service." "The Court found itself in the problematic position of choosing between or balancing two policy considerations�the efforts of the Supreme Court to upgrade the ethics of lawyers in government service on the one hand and, on the other, the right of government to recruit competent counsel to defend its interests," wrote Panganiban. The Court, in an 11-2 vote, denied the PCGG's petition charging the Sandiganbayan with "grave abuse of discretion" for denying Mendoza's disqualification. Puno wrote the decision for the majority. "The Court stressed that the rule had not been interpreted to cause a chilling effect on government recruitment of able legal talent," Panganiban wrote. Decisions Favor Mendoza's Clients To show his impartiality, Puno told us that he has voted "more times against Mendoza than for him." But we found this to be without basis. Our survey of 13 cases in the Supreme Court shows that Puno voted more often for the clients represented by Mendoza (11 cases) than he voted against them (two). Here are some of the more important cases: � Republic v. Cocofed; Mendoza for Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. - In 2001, the Supreme Court, by a divided vote (8-7), decided that the controlling shares in the United Coconut Planters Bank should be voted by the government because "they were purchased with funds that were prima facie public in character. This meant that UCPB would be controlled by the government as trustee for more than one million coconut farmers from whom these public funds had been exacted during the Marcos regime," Justice Panganiban wrote in Reforming the Judiciary. Puno dissented. � Republic v. Estate of Hans Menzi, Mendoza for Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. - The case involved a petition for review of the decision of the Sandiganbayan declaring some shares of stock in Manila Bulletin as ill gotten and some as validly owned by Cojuangco and other persons. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Sandiganbayan and Puno concurred in the result�that some Manila Bulletin shares in the name of Cojuangco were ill gotten, while others were validly acquired. � Marcos v. Sandiganbayan, Mendoza for Imelda Marcos - Marcos was accused of violating the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act and was sentenced by the Sandiganbayan to a prison term from nine to 12 years. The Supreme Court reversed the conviction in an 8-5 vote in 1998. Puno was among those who voted for Imelda's acquittal on the grounds that her trial was not impartial and she was convicted by a Sandiganbayan division that acted without jurisdiction. "The Imelda decision was received with much public dissatisfaction and deepened apprehensions that the Supreme Court was under the influence again of the leaders of the discredited martial law government," wrote former Supreme Court Justice Isagani Cruz in his book Res Gestae. Similarly, Panganiban, in Battles in the Supreme Court, wrote that the decision "sharply divided the Court, stunned the public, and provoked frenzied and pained cries from the media." � Imelda Romualdez Marcos v. Comelec, Mendoza for Imelda Marcos - This case involved the issue of whether Marcos satisfied the residency requirement to become a qualified candidate for Congress representing Tacloban City in Leyte. Puno concurred with the decision of the Supreme Court that Marcos was qualified. � PCGG v. Cojuangco, Mendoza for respondent Eduardo Cojuangco Jr. - This case dealt with the issue of who had the authority to represent and vote a certain number of shares in San Miguel Corporation that the PCGG had sequestered. Puno concurred in the unanimous resolution remanding the case to the Sandiganbayan. � PLDT Company, Inc. v. the City of Davao, Mendoza for PLDT - The Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company sought exemption from the franchise tax imposed by Davao City on the basis of income received within their territory. In the Court's decision (9-5), Justice Vicente Mendoza said that PLDT is subject to the local franchise tax imposed by Davao City, citing provisions of the Local Government Code, among others. Puno dissented. Friends and Decisions Harry Angping"Loyalty is his virtue," Angping says of Puno. This may partly explain Puno's favorable decisions in cases involving his friends. Angping, who met Puno more than 20 years ago, is the wedding godfather of one of Puno's sons. A former Manila congressman, Angping is known for his active participation in the impeachment move against then Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. in 2003. Puno voted against Davide then, calling for "judicial restraint." While Angping says that he never asks the Chief Justice for legal help "out of respect�because everything is based on merit," he once got a favorable decision from the Supreme Court penned by Puno when he was still associate justice. Angping was running for his last term in Congress in 2004 but withdrew when faced with a disqualification case questioning his citizenship. His wife, Zenaida, ran in his stead but lost to opponent Miles Roces. Zenaida then went to the Supreme Court to question the Comelec's decision denying her "due course." The poll body declared Harry's withdrawal moot and ordered election officials not to count votes cast in Harry's favor. In a 20-page decision in September 2005, the High Court en banc ruled that the Comelec violated the right of the Angpings to due process. Puno decided in favor of Zenaida (against Roces) but she lost at the House or Representatives Electoral Tribunal in the recount. Zenaida ran in this year's election, again versus Roces, and won. Angping says his wife took her oath of office before the Chief Justice on May 17, a few days after the elections, "the first" elected official to do so. Puno then hosted a simple lunch in his chambers because it was his 67th birthday. Another close friend of the Chief Justice is businessman and San Miguel Corp. president Ramon Ang, also a wedding godfather to one of his sons. (We asked Puno, through his spokesman Midas Marquez, about the friendship, but Marquez said this was "personal" so he had to ask the Chief Justice�but did not have the chance to. We also wrote Ang a letter. Apparently, both parties do not want to make their friendship known.) Ang's business interests include Cyber Bay Corp., of which he has been chairman and president since 1999. Cyber Bay is the parent company of Central Bay Reclamation Development Corp., which entered into a joint agreement with the Public Estates Authority (PEA) during President Ramos's term to reclaim 750 hectares of land along Manila Bay for its flagship waterfront project. This became highly controversial as the Senate questioned the agreement on the grounds that reclaimed lands form part of the public domain and cannot be disposed of by the PEA to private corporations. It dragged through two administrations. Eventually, the case reached the Supreme Court. In 2002, the Court, in a 13-0 vote and through a decision penned by Justice Antonio Carpio, nullified the agreement saying that reclaimed lands could only be leased�not sold�to corporations while submerged lands are "outside the commerce of man." However, on a motion for reconsideration, Puno reversed himself and voted to sustain the agreement arguing that the majority decision should apply to future cases only�and spare the Cyber Bay project. In his separate opinion, he called for judicial fairness, saying that the corporation had already invested P9 billion. "Our decision has far-reaching effect on persons and entities similarly situated as Amari�We cannot invite investors and then decapitate them without due process of law." We asked him about this reversal in an interview. He said that he rarely changes his decisions�"that's more the exception"�and that, in the Amari case, "it was really on the aspect of the retroactivity of the decision." Intellectually Agile ImageThe Chief Justice, while intellectually agile�he combines a superb knowledge of the law with facility with the English language�seems not to recognize ethical boundaries. He can stand for two opposite things, like martial rule and the protection of human rights. It's as if his is a two-chambered personality: one is where his lofty principles stay, and the other, where personal interests reside and neither collides with the other. Outside the courtroom, we came across an indication of another ethical lapse. Under his watch, the Supreme Court, through a foundation, accepted a donation of P1.2 million from a litigant, Eduardo Cojuangco Jr., for the judicial excellence awards. (Cojuangco has a pending coconut levy case in the Court.) Surely, he has his own admirers, as seen in the call of three left-wing Catholic bishops for him to lead a "transition junta" in lieu of the current government. As Chief Justice and defender of the Constitution, he did not debunk the idea of a junta�which is unconstitutional�but instead said he felt "humbled by the trust" and asked that the Supreme Court be kept out of politics. The Chief Justice will serve until May 2010. If the Social Weather Stations survey of September are a gauge, the public (35 percent) is either dissatisfied with Puno�his satisfaction rating is a �5�or they are undecided about him (31 percent) because they don't know him. Unfortunately, many do not scrutinize decisions of the Supreme Court, abetted by the fact that they are written in inaccessible language. This keeps the public in the dark on the work of the justices. Moreover, it's not easy to get to know the Chief Justice. As one of his professors at the UP College of Law, Maria Clara Campos, says, "He doesn't reveal much." But as Puno seeks to win the public over, substance, more than image, will matter. And that should come from the core of a justice's work, his decisions, which, ultimately, reflect what he stands for. - with research from Purple S. Romero OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Reactions to [email protected]. To subscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Subscribe. To unsubscribe, send a blank email with the subject heading Unsubscribe. |