Next year’s telenovela
Eleven years ago, in the midst of the Christmas season, the nation awaited with guarded eagerness the resumption of the impeachment trial of then President Joseph Estrada.
Shortly before the trial was suspended in the evening of Dec. 23, 2000, a surprise witness, Clarissa Ocampo, dropped a bombshell when she pointed to Estrada as the owner of the controversial “Velarde account.”
Her testimony became the talk of family and social gatherings during the long holiday. Without the benefit of hearing Estrada’s side, public opinion turned against the former president. By the time the trial resumed two weeks later, his goose was cooked.
Three weeks from now, the nation will go through another impeachment trial experience with Chief Justice Renato Corona on the hot seat.
Unless he does a Merceditas Gutierrez, i.e., resigns before the start of the proceedings (which he earlier vowed he will not do), a political cum legal telenovela is in the offing.
Corona will enter the fray with a serious image problem. The latest SWS survey showed him as the least trusted official in the top echelon of the three branches of government.
Ranged against him is President Aquino who, in the same survey, enjoyed a high trust rating among the people on the back of his anticorruption campaign against erring officials of the past administration.
Concerns
True to form, the legal community is divided on the issue. Some lawyers’ organizations say Corona’s impeachment is an indirect assault on the independence of the judiciary and should therefore be resisted for the good of our democracy.
Others think his impeachment is part of the checks-and-balance processes provided for in the Constitution to make sure each branch of government does its mandated responsibilities.
Prudently, the business community has adopted a hands-off policy on the matter. Some business groups have posted newspaper advertisements expressing neutrality on the dispute between the heads of the executive and judicial branches of government.
That public stance, however, should not be interpreted to mean that the business community is happy with the way the judiciary is performing its duties and responsibilities.
Of particular concern to many businessmen is the issue of flip flopping decisions, one of the charges against Corona in the articles of impeachment.
While it is true that the Supreme Court has the right to reverse or modify its decisions as the circumstances of the case may warrant, businessmen find it disconcerting that on an issue as important as the grant of city status to 16 municipalities, the court changed its mind four times.
Indecision
The flip flops would have been understandable if the underlying reasons were based on substantial legal grounds. The problem is, the votes changed depending on who replaced the justice who earlier cast the deciding vote for or against the city hood grant.
As if the city hood controversy were not enough to make businessmen jittery about the stability of the tribunal’s decisions, then came the surprising withdrawal of a “final final” decision involving the flight attendants of Philippine Airlines.
On the basis of a letter, not a formal pleading, by PAL’s lawyer, the tribunal threw away 13 years of litigation over a simple dismissal issue on a technicality (the wrong division rendered the decision) and ordered the case to be reviewed all over again.
This unprecedented move raised serious questions not only about the integrity of the tribunal’s internal processes in the management of cases but also its application of its appeals rules depending on the stature of the lawyer of the party who invokes it.
When this “flip flop charge” is taken up during the impeachment trial, expect the business community to keenly observe the evidence presented to prove or disprove it.
Legal gobbledygook aside, the businessmen would know whether the tribunal can be relied upon to consistently render fair and equitable decisions on business disputes, or they just have to pray to the gods that good luck be on their side when their cases reach the highest level of the judicial hierarchy.
Preoccupation
Using the Estrada impeachment trial as the benchmark, Corona’s coming legal ordeal will, in all likelihood, be treated as a media event complete with all the trimmings necessary to make it a blockbuster, at least in terms of viewership or readership ratings.
It will be recalled that during Estrada’s trial, the country’s major radio and TV stations, including their provincial stations, aired live the proceedings in the Senate.
On account of the extensive media coverage, life in the major population centers practically grounded to a halt as people were either glued to their TV sets or went about their daily routine while listening to the radio.
The running joke at that time was the country’s productivity dipped and government operations slowed down every time the Estrada’s trial went on stream.
Much as government officials and employees and their counterpart in the private sector wanted to maintain a business-as-usual posture while the trial was going on, they could not help but pause whenever they feel that something dramatic was about to happen or some senator wanted to enjoy his 10 minutes of glory.
Let’s go on with the Corona telenovela and be done with it as soon as possible so that, either way it goes, the nation can return to its normal life.
Happy New Year!
(For feedback, please write to [email protected].)
