The Supreme Court resolution regarding the investigation by the special panel on the briber scandal in the Court of Appeals case regarding the controversy involving MERALCO and the GSIS came out on yesterday, September 9, 2008. The Supreme Court removed Vicente Roxas from the Court of Appeals, suspended Jose Sabio for two months, severely reprimanded Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez, reprimanded and admonished three other justices who were part of the controversy, recommended the institution of disbarment proceedings against PCGG chairman Camilo Sabio and for the Justice Department to study the criminal charges that may be filed against businessman Francis De Borja.
In a way, it may be said that a cancerous growth has been removed from the judiciary but continuing on this analogy, more needs to be done. As anyone who had cancer or knows someone who did, removing a cancerous growth is only the first step. First, one must make sure that all the cancerous growth have been removed. Then there is also a need to determine if there are other cancerous growths elsewhere. If so, those have to be treated as well.
On the issue of whether or not the all the cancerous cells have been removed, most people are of the belief that that is not the case. Only one of the justices of the five who have been found to have varying degrees of culpability have been removed from his position. We are talking here of the Court of Appeals, the second highest court in the land. While negligence or ignorance of the rules and procedures may me excusable in lower courts, we require a higher standard of behavior, if not ethics, of the higher courts. All this talk about members of the judiciary being like Caesar's wife is not idle talk. At least it should not be. Not only must judges be pure, they must also appear to be pure, just like Caesar's wife.
Jose Sabio entertained, or at least did not shun attempts to influence his decision, a clear violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Worse, he thought there was nothing wrong with his brother calling him and trying to convince him to rule one way as he did not allow himself to be influenced. I do not believe it is ignorance that led him to believe this. Even a first year law student would know that such behavior is unacceptable. Hell, any person with some sense of decency and fair play would find such actuations contrary to everyday, run-of-the-mill rules of fair play. It was possibly hubris, thinking that the standards set out in the Code of Judicial Conduct were open to one's interpretation.
The other justices who were found wanting also got off easy, to the detriment of the judiciary. It bears reiterating that the Court of Appeals is second only to the Supreme Court as the highest judicial authority in the land. It is already unconscionable that justices with malice in their hearts or mush in their heads have reached this high in the judiciary, it would be much worse that after finding out who these are, they are merely given slaps on the wrists. Any case that would later on come before these erring justices would be tainted with suspicion. And suspicion has a funny way of rubbing off on those around it. Second chances are good but with the integrity of our judicial system at stake, let these justices get their second chances somewhere else.
The Supreme Court should take this opportunity to do a major housecleaning in the Court of Appeals and elsewhere in the judicial branch. How likely is it that all the bad eggs in the Court of Appeals found their way to just one division? Not very likely. Rumors of impropriety reek around labor cases so the the Supreme Court may start with the Court of Appeals division handling labor case, down to the National Labor Relations Commission and the labor arbiters. The Supreme Court might as well extend the housecleaning down to the rank and file like clerks of court and sheriffs who seem to be much well off financially than the officers of the court that they serve.
Unfortunately, if history is any indication, the Supreme Court would just rule that the matter of corruption has been resolved as in two previous occasions when members of the Court of Appeals have been dismissed. We'd then be clamoring again for a clean-up of the judiciary once another scandal erupts in the judiciary.
In a way, it may be said that a cancerous growth has been removed from the judiciary but continuing on this analogy, more needs to be done. As anyone who had cancer or knows someone who did, removing a cancerous growth is only the first step. First, one must make sure that all the cancerous growth have been removed. Then there is also a need to determine if there are other cancerous growths elsewhere. If so, those have to be treated as well.
On the issue of whether or not the all the cancerous cells have been removed, most people are of the belief that that is not the case. Only one of the justices of the five who have been found to have varying degrees of culpability have been removed from his position. We are talking here of the Court of Appeals, the second highest court in the land. While negligence or ignorance of the rules and procedures may me excusable in lower courts, we require a higher standard of behavior, if not ethics, of the higher courts. All this talk about members of the judiciary being like Caesar's wife is not idle talk. At least it should not be. Not only must judges be pure, they must also appear to be pure, just like Caesar's wife.
Jose Sabio entertained, or at least did not shun attempts to influence his decision, a clear violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct. Worse, he thought there was nothing wrong with his brother calling him and trying to convince him to rule one way as he did not allow himself to be influenced. I do not believe it is ignorance that led him to believe this. Even a first year law student would know that such behavior is unacceptable. Hell, any person with some sense of decency and fair play would find such actuations contrary to everyday, run-of-the-mill rules of fair play. It was possibly hubris, thinking that the standards set out in the Code of Judicial Conduct were open to one's interpretation.
The other justices who were found wanting also got off easy, to the detriment of the judiciary. It bears reiterating that the Court of Appeals is second only to the Supreme Court as the highest judicial authority in the land. It is already unconscionable that justices with malice in their hearts or mush in their heads have reached this high in the judiciary, it would be much worse that after finding out who these are, they are merely given slaps on the wrists. Any case that would later on come before these erring justices would be tainted with suspicion. And suspicion has a funny way of rubbing off on those around it. Second chances are good but with the integrity of our judicial system at stake, let these justices get their second chances somewhere else.
The Supreme Court should take this opportunity to do a major housecleaning in the Court of Appeals and elsewhere in the judicial branch. How likely is it that all the bad eggs in the Court of Appeals found their way to just one division? Not very likely. Rumors of impropriety reek around labor cases so the the Supreme Court may start with the Court of Appeals division handling labor case, down to the National Labor Relations Commission and the labor arbiters. The Supreme Court might as well extend the housecleaning down to the rank and file like clerks of court and sheriffs who seem to be much well off financially than the officers of the court that they serve.
Unfortunately, if history is any indication, the Supreme Court would just rule that the matter of corruption has been resolved as in two previous occasions when members of the Court of Appeals have been dismissed. We'd then be clamoring again for a clean-up of the judiciary once another scandal erupts in the judiciary.
No comments:
Post a Comment