Corona’s conviction against political patronage

HAPPY WEEKEND
Gina Dizon

History has proven that a general number of employees and officers appointed by persons in authority return the “favor” by doing or omitting acts in favor of the appointing or recommending officer and in the process, further patronage politics and corruption.

Such is manifested during elections where the appointing officer is voted into office by the appointee, and acts done or not done in favor of the appointing or recommending officer.

In like manner, Chief Justice Renato Corona, former chief of staff and legal counsel to former Philippine president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo would have the tendency to vote for decisions before the Supreme Court favoring the former president. Why should he not?

GMA appointed Corona May 17, 2010 as midnight Chief Justice and placed him to where he is now, and also appointed his wife Cristina Corona as Chairman of the John Hay Management Corporation receiving P1.9 million or nearly P2 million in salaries and benefits in 2009. Why should he not be beholden to the former president? Unless he is doing his job per se and his appointment not influential of his decisions remains to be seen.

Corona’s questioned voting pattern where such may be heavily influenced by his “loyalty” to GMA is now left under the scrutiny and judgment of the 23 senator judges to determine loaded charges of betrayal of public trust and culpable violation of the Constitution whether such charges are true or not.

The questioned SC list of decisions as having been done with betrayal of public trust particularly include the invalidation by the Supreme Court of the Executive Order creating the Truth Commission by President Benigno Aquino, and the issuance by the Court of a temporary restraining order against the government’s watch list order preventing Mrs. Arroyo from departing for a scheduled medical checkup abroad and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo “to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the ends of justice”. The latter is one among eight charges where Corona has to show his impartiality in such a collegial decision.

The Lower House in their petition forwarded that “the Supreme Court, under respondent Corona immediately acted upon the petition and granted the TRO despite the fact that there are clear inconsistencies in former President Arroyo’s petition”.

Newsbreak report showed that “he has consistently sided with the (Arroyo) administration in politically-significant cases”. Newsbreak further reported when it tracked the voting pattern of Supreme Court justices, “Corona lodged a high 78 percent in favor of Arroyo”.

This tracking shall now be viewed as to its factually logical conclusions whether there may be truth to such. And where there may be rests upon the intelligent and wise decisions of the 23 senator- judges to use their political arguments to arrive at a sound decision best favoring the people of the Philippines. The Constitution provides 2/3 vote to convict the impeached chief justice.

And as the congressmen- prosecutors forwarded in their argument, Coronas’ vote is what he shall account contesting Corona’s assertion that SC decisions are arrived at as one collegial body. It would be interesting to know how the senator judges shall decide on an obvious claim of Corona that his decision is one of a collegial decision.

Where Corona’s political past is as clear as the clear blue skies, whatever his ‘bias’ shall be technically hidden in a decision by a collegial body of the Supreme Court who in the first place is partly composed of nine midnight appointees in the first place.

What more, Corona has an ace with the Integrated Bar of the Philippines who forwarded that SC decisions are done as a collegial body and not by the Chief Justice alone. The IBP found the Lower House’s impeachment complaint as ‘discriminatory’ against Corona questioning why Corona was singled out for impeachment when Court rulings are decided collegially or by majority vote.
With these allegations which shall be incised and analyzed to arrive at a conclusive decision whether there was bias in favor of GMA leaves much of the senator-judges’ conscience how best they shall dispose of the questions at hand as to whether or not Corona committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayed public trust.

As Senator Joker Arroyo said, “There is very little question of facts in all the eight articles. There are more (legal) arguments than evidence,” Arroyo said.

The rest of the charges including that of alleged graft and corruption seemingly is not going to work against Corona with the Commission on Audit finding nothing illegal in the disbursement of Judicial Development Fund. Recent news reveals that the Supreme Court (SC) had “no serious fund irregularities in 2010, according to a Commission on Audit (COA) report. Except for some accounting errors like misstatements of balances, unliquidated cash advances, uncollected fees, as well as recording and classification errors, there was nothing in the COA report that would indicate fund misuse in the Supreme Court, much less one involving Chief Justice Renato Corona.”

This leaves the question what the Filipino people will get out of this Corona impeachment brouhaha. Where evidence may be weak leaves much to be culled from how senator judges will decide based on their justiciable conscience. Where the senator judges may find no compelling evidence in the complaint may mean dismissal of the complaint.

Where the political exercise finds dismissal of the complaint shall further a system of political patronage and further corruption. The rule of law shall persist to be mocked at. This will also make the country continue to be ruled by persons who are beholden to their appointing patrons. The country’s political system shall continue to be a scramble at the beckoning power of powers that be and a proliferation of bootlickers. What a shame!

Where recommendations and appointments carry with these a compelling return to a ‘favor’ done by an appointing or recommending officer shall make this country as what it is- corrupt and impoverished- with the chosen very few continuing to enjoy the taxes of people and the vast majority of the Filipino people wallow in poverty and continued subservience. Let it not be.

As the year of the Dragon comes with its wisdom, let this impeachment exercise find wisdom as well in wisely disposing a case which will test the rule of law and realize a society of dignified Filipino people