Based on Justice Secretary Leila de Lima’s account of how she transitioned from being a “reluctant” nominee for Supreme Court chief justice to one who will be a “unifying force” in the judiciary, it happened after her meeting with President Aquino.
It is presumed that unlike Internal Revenue Commissioner Kim Henares who decided to stay put at the Bureau of Internal Revenue after she was told that it is important that the reforms she has introduced in the agency have to sustained, De Lima was encouraged by the President.
Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda said De Lima told him that the President’s encouragement consisted of “It’s up to you, you make your decision.”
Lacierda also said whatever decision De Lima makes, the President will respect it.
That’s enough for De Lima to declare that there is a need for a unifying force in the judiciary and she’s it. “What the judiciary needs right now is a trusted and effective leader,” she said.
“Maybe a fresh face is welcome,” she said.
Based on De Lima’s two-year performance as justice secretary, what kind of trusted and effective leadership would she provide the Supreme Court?
It would be recalled that De Lima’s won the admiration of Aquino when she stopped Gloria Arroyo from leaving the country even without a hold departure order that only a court can issue. The Constitution’s Bill of Rights states that a citizen’s right to travel should not be impaired except upon lawful order of the court except in the interest of national security, public safety, or public health as may be provided by law.
De Lima defied the Supreme Court’s temporary restraining order on her Watch List Order. Yes, this cabinet member who thinks her order is higher than that of the Supreme Court wants to be the chief magistrate, the chief interpreter of the country’s laws.
What was not questioned by those who applauded De Lima’s bulldozer tactic on Arroyo was, why was there no case filed by De Lima almost two years that she was on the job?
A case was finally filed three days after that airport incident : electoral sabotage in connection with the 2007 election. The case was haphazardly done, it was so weak . It was as if the case was meant to be dismissed.
Reliable sources said Pasay RTC Judge Jesus Mupas initially declined to issue a warrant of arrest to justify the continued detention of Arroyo. Some arm twisting had to be done. A member of the judiciary who “convinced” Mupas to issue the warrant of arrest was promoted to the Court of Appeals shortly after .
Aquino’s choice of the successor of the disgraced Renato Corona will show the kind of ”reform” that he wants in the judiciary. Will it be a genuine and lasting reform for good governance? Or will it be another era of legal shortcuts, of the end justifying the means which would be no different from Arroyo’s.
For Aquino to appoint De Lima chief justice, her name has to be included in the short list that the Judicial and Bar Council will sent to Malacañang.
The JBC is supposedly an independent body but as a VERA Files report on the judiciary said “Several lawyers, judges and members of civil society interviewed …questioned the independence of the JBC, whose members are often alter egos of the President appointed to make sure his choices end up in the council’s list.”
One reporter sees an advantage of De Lima as chief justice:,”Kung si Leila ma-appoint na CJ, ia-appoint niya sarili nya as spokesperson of the SC. Lol! If De Lima is appointed CJ, she will appoint herself spokesperson of SC. Lol!”
LOL is short for Hahaha! Laughing out Loud!.
My comments lang sa article, Ms. Ellen.
First of all, I am not in favor na si De Lima ang maappoint na Chief Justice as I still maintain that the Chief Justice should come from within, among the incumbent SC justices.
1. Re Arroyo case: It is a question of what was legal and what was the right thing to do. It was not legal to defy the TRO pero kung hindi naman dinefy, nakalipad si GMA. Sa laki ng kasalanan ni GMA sa mga Pilipino, it was the right thing na deadmahin ang TRO para hindi makalabas ng bansa si GMA.
2. Yung sa cases against GMA, I had posted na before pa na GMA made sure na walang paper trail or documentary evidence that will link her to any capital and non bailable offense, It will take someone within her circle to squeal para ma pinpoint ang GMA. Hindi ganun kadali mag build ng kaso against GMA na hindi sya makapag bail. Tignan na lang sa Ombudsman na isang taon na halos sa pwesto si Ombudsman Morales. Matinik si Morales pero maski sa Ombudsman, hirap na mag file ng non bailable offense against GMA.
3. De Lima as DOJ secretary – nahihighlight sa media ang kapalpakan ng DOJ pero yung positive reforms (although far and between din, i will admit) na isasantabi. Hindi na yung mga pag sujeto sa mga erring fiscals at it will take more than three years bago ma uproot ang mga iyan. Ang example ko yung may direct effect sa public: ang pag alis ng legal fees kung mag fifile ng kaso sa fiscal office. De Lima should be credited din naman.
4. I know that you have reliable sources, but I do no get the Judge Mupas-influence peddler now a CA justice connection.
5. JBC – ang 3 members ay ex officio members. Yung permanent members ngayon, 2 ay appointees ni GMA at 2 ang kay Pnoy. As i have posted noon, hindi ang JBC ang may problema, ang appointing power o ang president ang may diperensya lalo na nung panahon ni GMA. lately, pinupublish na ng JBC ang result ng voting sa mga candidates which is a good sign.
If i was in the JBC, i would ask — would she abstain in the GMA cases?
Baka masterplan ito ni GMA. Lose a battle but win the war.
I am not in favor of De Lima for two reasons:
(1) She’s not the best choice (maybe later on but not now as she has a lot to prove still).
(2) Like how Ma’am Ellen said, De Lima said it as well before. She does not have the characteristics of a CJ that remains silent and quiet. Medyo always on the spotlight sya.
I’m glad Henares decline. I’m hoping Aquino will not choose De Lima.
Two birds in one stone, SC chief na spooksperson pa. Hehehe!
When Pnoy appoints Leila, panalo na naman si Gloria!
Secretary De Lima is a bit of a pit bull, snarling first and thinking later. I like her in her current position. A Chief Justice needs to be reflective first, and speak carefully and according to law. Furthermore, if the JBC or President Aquino are interested in the independence of the Courts, they would not want an Aquino cabinet member being nominated. The PERCEPTION is politics over objectivity and the law, whether real or not. And perception counts when trust is the issue.
We should be able to trust our Chief Justice. Not continue with the gameplaying.
By accepting her nomination for the CJ post, De Lima really put PNoy in a delimma. We don’t know the thinking of the President but if I’m in his shoes, I will appoint Carpio as CJ being the most senior and at the same time, appoint De Lima as associate justice.
Ellen,
In that case the JBC should not include de Lima in the shortlist.
Ngayon kung isama siya sa shortlist at ang ibang nominees na kasama niya ay si AJ Presbiterio Velasco at si AJ Arturo Brion, gago ba ang presidente kung si Leila ang pipiliin over those two? Sa madaling salita, nasa kamay ng JBC yan.
Hindi bawal ang mag-lobby. Natural lang yan. At hindi rin masama makinig sa iba’t ibang opinion. Ang masama ay kung ang basehan ng pagpili sa shortlist ay taliwas sa sinumpang tungkulin ng JBC .
As to describing De Lima as “this cabinet member who thinks her order is higher than that of the Supreme Court”..
I think that is not exactly accurate. At the time of GMA’s attempted departure the legal basis of the TRO was not clear. Did GMA meet ALL the PRECONDITIONS making the TRO effective? The language of the TRO was not clear on the matter. That gave De Lima legal elbow room to do thr right thing. Proof that the language was not clear is the SC some days later had to make a specific ruling clarifying that issue.
And to date the court has not cited De Lima for contempt. As a matter of fact, the JBC accepted her nomination to the SC with the SC not expressing any objection.
kaya gusugustuhin ni PeNoy na maging CJ si leila dilemna o dilimna ay dahil pareho silang mga walang preno ang bunganga kapag gustong magmagaling sa publiko tungkol sa mga kasong kanilang hinahabol lalo’t sangkot ang mag-asawang masiba.
kaya sila napapalpak ay dahil hindi pa man nagkakaroon ng progress ang alinmang kaso, naniniguro agad sila ng positibong resulta. nakakalimutan nilang marami pang galamay ang kanilang hinahabol at dahil sa kaway ng kinang ng salapi ay nagpapakamatay pa rin ang mga galamay at tagapagtanggol ng babaeng kawatan.
okey lang sanang CJ si leila (ma)dilim (pa), ang problema nga la’ang ay ‘yung parang masinggang bunganga niya!
same same pa rin ang nangyayari sa kasalukuyang gobyerno kung ikukumpara kung paano hinamig lahat ni goyang ang kanyang mga galamay noong kapanahunan ng kanyang inangaw at ipinandayang administrasyon.
paano nga tayo magkakaisa at mabubuklod kapag ganyan ang sistema?
Me and my dirty mind.
This is the perfect stealth move. I put the favored person along with two perfect rejects. That ties the hands of the appointing power.
Sneaky.
OT
NasPi asks US for spy planes flyover.
http://www.philstar.com/nation/article.aspx?publicationsubcategoryid=63&articleid=824024
What for? Hindi ka naman lalaban (kuno). So what is the purpose of the spy plane? If it is merely to add factual basis for a legal challenge, there are other means. Kaya namang makita yan ng google earth, dahil ships naman ang nakaparada.
Akala ko ba we are trying to assert sovereignty? We do that by running to another sovereign? Diyos ko po.
Ano ang kapalit na hihingin ni Uncle Sam? Are we sure that the exploration of those waters will be equitable with the favorite Uncle? Why don’t you ask NAPOCOR what the California company charges for the geothermal plant in Bicol? Why don’t you review the deals with Libya on oil, before Qaddhafi. Or how how the deals with the STANS (Uzbekistan, etc.) on oil exploration?
Ano ang hihingin sana ng China? Do we know? That is the only way you will know whether partnering with a friend is better than sharing with the “enemy”.
The UK? British Petroleum? Read the books of Greg Palast.
Sinong dumbkopf ang malapit sa Pangulo? Is he being set up?
When there is a cordon sanitaire, you don’t get the truth. You get what you want to hear. Or worse; you get what the aide wants you to hear.
SnV, Diyos ko po talaga.
Hindi ko alam kung ako ay tatawa o hihimatayin.
I will write about this for my Friday column. Nakakahiya talaga.
Akala yata ni Pnoy computer war games this dispute with China.
Sinong dumbkopf ang malapit sa Pangulo? Is he being set up? -SnV
I understand even the advisers were shocked. I’ve written a few times that there’s a need talaga for the President to keep his mouth shut on sensitive matters.
I’ll say that again.
De Lima?….. N/A as CJ period!
Why?….. Talkative & media addict…
Noong panahon ni GMA walang angal ang mga tao sa media kung sino ang ilagay ni GMA sa SC. Oo, maraming ingay, pero wala naman talagang makaangal.
Eto pa isa, walang consistency ang mga taong magagaling magsalita: isang araw sunugin si Gloria, next kawawa naman, for humanitarian reasons palabasin ng bayan. Isang araw, kudos kay De lima, susunod tuta ni Pnoy.
Payp ng isang professor, be consistent in your position, otherwise you lose credebility and achieve nothing!
Consistency is based on principles. It should never be personality based. The criticism is based on issue.
Did the official follow the law? Did the official apply the law consistently?
Let’s praise a good deed and criticize a wrong deed.
That’s consistency.
Noong panahon ni GMA walang angal ang mga tao sa media kung sino ang ilagay ni GMA sa SC. Oo, maraming ingay, pero wala naman talagang makaangal.-Amba
That’s why she is hated. That’s why people want her punished. That’s why I find the DOJ remiss that no case was filed against her in the almost two years of the Aquino administration. Until Arroyo attempted to leave the country. And she had to twist the law to do that.
I don’t know about you if you kept quite during Arroyo’s time.That’s not the case with me. As long as there is irregularity, once there are deviations from what is right, it’s the duty of the public, including media, to tell those in power. That’s vigilance.
The person is secondary. It’s the act that should be the issue.
From the Tribune.
Xiao xin yi dian
From the Manila Standard.
Xiao xin i tien
I hope somebody bothered to instruct Lacierda on the Mandarin, as well as on the pronunciation. Chinese is a very inflected language. The same sound like “ma” can have four different intonations and meanings based on the intonation.
ilang taon na ba si leila delimna? 52 years old?
ano ba ang retirement age ng isang CJ? 70?
should PeNoy appoint his pet, leila, how many years will she be s(h)itting as CJ? less than 18 years? how many presidents after the PeNoy will be deprived of the power to appoint his choice of a CJ? tatlong presidente?
dyuspuday!
sobrang labing pitong taon tayong matuturete sa walang puknat na ratatat ng bunganga ni deleila delimna?
18 years as SC chief si Leila kapag nagkataon. That’s another serious curse on Pinas.
Welcome note at the SC Web by the Rt. Hon. CJ Beverly McLachlin..the First Woman appointed CJ and the 3rd to the SC…nominated by Liberal PM Jean Chretien, presidede over his Government, of PM John Turner, also a Liberal and the current Conservative PM Harper and she is the same with her Principles all throughout her Judicial career….
and here is her address to the the Public…Which is still the basis for which the courts must be guided upon…
Canadians are privileged to live in a peaceful country. Much of our collective sense of freedom and safety comes from our community’s commitment to a few key values: democratic governance, respect for fundamental rights and the rule of law, and accommodation of difference. Our commitment to these values must be renewed on every occasion, and the institutions that sustain them must be cherished. Among those institutions, I believe that Canadian courts, including the Supreme Court of Canada, play an important role. A strong and independent judiciary guarantees that governments act in accordance with our Constitution. Judges give effect to our laws and give meaning to our rights and duties as Canadians.
resolution of disputes, and for the reasoned and dispassionate discussion of our most pressing social issues. Every judge in Canada is committed to performing this important role skillfully and impartially. Canadians should expect no less.
#16-17:
Keep your eyes on the price. Look at the big picture. Your idea of consistency is nitpicking. Nitpickers have a narrow view on issues. They can’t see beyond what’s infront of them. They are the worst allies one can have.
My lawyer friends think De Lima will not be in the shortlist of JBC. The only one, they said, who may support her is Cong. Niel Tupas.
Escudero is not expected to vote for her. Jose Mejia,who is close to Executive Secretary Jojo Ochoa, won’t vote for her.
The old timers in the JBC don’t like her for defying the SC.
She will remain in the DOJ.
Heto na naman. More defiance. This time, coming from the JBC, specifically Niel Tupas.
The Supreme Court, en banc, has designated Diosdado Peralta as its rep, and therefore, head of the JBC. This was done by the Supreme Court, in its supervisory capacity over the JBC.
Now, Niel Tupas and Att. Jose Mejia state that the head should be Hermosisima, as so designated by the JBC.
http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/nation/07/06/12/peralta-cant-preside-over-jbc-tupas-insists
The argument of Niel Tupas is that the matter about Diosdado Peralta heading the JBC was only a side issue in the case decided by the Supreme Court. If a pronouncement is made on an issue that is not the main issue, then it is considered an “obiter dictum”, which is not binding precedent.
That is the problem with Tupas’ incomplete understanding of the doctrine of obiter dictum.
It is not binding precedent; meaning, it cannot bind the Supreme Court when another similar case comes up; the Supreme Court may disregard it in future cases. But the order is still binding on the body that is subordinate to (being supervised by) the Supreme Court.
Tupas is courting a contempt citation with this imprecise understanding of the doctrine of obiter dictum.
Of course, the Supreme Court can just issue a resolution en banc stating that it has designated Peralta. Where does that leave Tupas then?
Why the objection to Peralta or any other justice for that matter? Because it adds one vote, maybe against their. Carpio is a non-vote, because he will recuse himself.
Yan na nga ba sabi ko. Sana di tinanggap ni Carpio ang nomination. Dahil ang galing niya puwedeng gamitin sa pamumuno ng pagpili ng CJ-able. Sayang.
Laos na si Hermosisima. ‘Di siya dapat mamuno ng JBC.
Wala nang magawa..kaya tama lang na may pumalit kay Carpio.
Ungas naman si Tupas at ang sasang-ayon sa kaniya kung hindi nila payagan mapasailalim ang JBC sa supervision ng SC.
Kay de Lima naman, dapat may pumalit din na DOJ Secretary bilang ex officio member ng JBC…
In short, magresign ka as DOJ Secretary ngayong tinanggap mo ang nominasyon para sa CJ post.