Executive-Judiciary relation: critical collaboration.

The Sona and the Supreme Court - INQUIRER.net, Philippine News for Filipinos


In his recent column (click link), former Chief Justice Art Panganiban made the following commentaries re: newly elected Pres. Noynoy Aquino's relationship with Chief Justice Renato Corona during the former's 6-year term of office which will end in June 2016:

1. Critical collaboration. I do not have the space to comment on all the problems facing P-Noy. Instead, I will carefully observe how he will define his relationship with the Supreme Court. His initial encounter with the Court was chilly. Dismayed by the its decision allowing outgoing President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo to appoint the new chief justice, he broke tradition and invited the decision’s forceful dissenter, instead of the new chief, to induct him. I think this is symbolic of his desire for transparency, accountability, gravitas and ethics from the justices.

2. Nonetheless, I am sure he realizes that the Court is a co-equal and co-independent branch of government. Hence, I think he will not maintain an unduly hostile stance, lest the Court be tempted to use its vast powers and stymie his plans, especially his judicial reforms. Neither should the relationship degenerate to coziness, lest the Court becomes subservient (as the “Arroyo Court” was perceived to be), always ready to obey executive whims and to defend presidential excesses, even if it means reversing age-old jurisprudence and inventing monstrous judicial fiats.

3. Ideally, the relationship should evolve to what the late Jaime Cardinal Sin called “critical collaboration,” collaborative in executive initiatives to reform society but critical in safeguarding the supremacy of the Constitution.

4. P-Noy can take refuge in the settled doctrine that in case of doubt, the courts are duty-bound to uphold executive actions, arising from the presumption of good faith and regularity in the performance of official duties. Only when there is grave—repeat, grave—abuse of discretion can the Supreme Court reverse or modify executive actions and programs.

5. So too, justices are answerable to history. Published in books and electronic libraries, their decisions are scrutinized minutely and eternally by lawyers and non-lawyers alike. Recently, they discovered that investigative journalists, like Marites Vitug, and civic groups, like Bantay Katarungan, have become bolder in exposing perceived judicial misconduct.

6. However, the real test of the justices will come when they face cases involving former President Arroyo and her family. For instance, will they, like the Commission on Elections, bend entrenched jurisprudence to indulge the party-list ambition of Mikey Arroyo? How will they dispel public perception of their alleged personal loyalty to the former first family?