Supreme Court under siege

PerryScope
By Perry Diaz  

Emboldened by their successful impeachment and removal from office of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona, several House members are eyeing several justices – as many as five -- to be impeached.  And if they succeed, President Benigno “P-Noy” Aquino III would be appointing their replacements, presumably magistrates who would vote on issues favorable to his administration.

Indeed, by having a Supreme Court majority – if not all – in his “pocket,” P-Noy would be the most powerful president in the history of the Philippines.  He already has control of the House of Representatives and the victory of his senatorial picks in last May’s midterm elections would give him an unprecedented control of the three branches of government.  Congress and the Supreme Court would be nothing more than glorified lackeys who would do P-Noy’s bidding.

But not only did he take absolute control of the House and the Senate, he now has usurped the “power of the purse,” which has always been the domain of Congress.  And since the Supreme Court ruled that the Priority Development Assistance Program (PDAF) -- “pork barrel” -- P-Noy has one leverage left that he can use to keep the lawmakers in line; and that is, the Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP).

As the name suggests, DAP accelerates the disbursement of funds siphoned off from budget items in a discretionary fashion, no questions asked, and no audits performed.  It provides P-Noy with a power never before held by any president before him.  And if he succeeds in removing at least three Supreme Court magistrates, he’d have a majority of the High Court that would be supportive of him in his attempt to secure the High Court’s imprimatur on DAP.

Collision course

A couple of weeks ago, the House Justice Committee announced that the House of Representatives might soon be investigating lump sum appropriations of the Judiciary.

Iloilo City Rep. Niel Tupas, who heads the Justice Committee was reported to have said, “I am referring to the JDF, to the special allowances of the judges. I think it should be scrutinized, within the committee.”  The Judiciary Development Fund (JDF) is a multibillion-peso lump sum appropriation administered by the Supreme Court. 

But Tupas, who was the lead prosecutor of the impeachment trial of former Chief Justice Renato Corona, maintained that his committee’s desire to scrutinize the JDF is not retaliatory to the High Court’s ruling that PDAF was unconstitutional.  He reportedly said that “he would like to restore balance to the three branches of government.”  However, Tupas admitted that the High Court’s 14-0 ruling against the PDAF has made Congress more aggressive and would be more involved in the coming year.  He likened the ruling to “one branch of the government trampling on the rights and jurisdiction of another branch.”   

While it is understandable that Congress was furious at the Supreme Court because of the PDAF ruling, to investigate the JDF would appear  retaliatory.  But retaliatory or not, many believe that the investigation is a precursor of the filing of impeachment charges against several justices.   One lawmaker, Cavite Rep. Elpidio Barzaga Jr., reportedly admitted that the House Judiciary Committee investigation into the High Court’s use of the JDF could be an impeachable offense, especially if it’s found out that there is evidence of graft.

With P-Noy’s allies in control of the House, impeachment charges could easily be  passed in the same manner that it was done during the impeachment of Corona, which many believe was railroaded.   

With oral arguments on the constitutionality of DAP set for January 28, 2014, P-Noy’s allies in Congress have to move very fast.  They might be able to achieve it in the House; however, they may not be able move fast in the Senate where the multiple trials would be conducted.  Or, P-Noy’s allies in the Senate could attempt to pass a resolution to hold only one impeachment trial for all the impeached magistrates.   Is the country ready for a wholesale purge of the Judiciary?  Would the people condone a mob assault on the highest tribunal of the land?  Which makes one wonder why would P-Noy take such a risky move and put his administration – win or lose -- in a very bad light?       

High stakes gamble

With PDAF deemed unconstitutional, DAP is now the only “pork” game in town.   But it is controlled by P-Noy.  To whom he doles out to is entirely his prerogative.  There are no audits and there is no congressional oversight.  However, if the Supreme Court decides that it is constitutional, then it would make P-Noy a virtual dictator and would be able to allocate the P1.3-trillion DAP for political patronage.  It would be the new pork barrel.  The only difference is that it is insanely humongous.  Had the High Court upheld PDAF, it would only be P27 billion in 2014.  DAP would make every member of Congress a minion of P-Noy who would rubber stamp any bill each time P-Noy pushes the button.

On the other hand, if the High Court rules that DAP were unconstitutional, it would diminish the power of P-Noy and curtail his ability to push his legislative agenda.  And it would make him a lame duck President for the rest of his term. 

Presidential pressure

It did not then come as surprise when reports started trickling down the pipeline that Malacañang had been secretly wooing the magistrates to vote in favor of DAP.  Some reports way that P-Noy needs three more justices to keep his DAP.  Some say he only needs two more.

If he were successful in convincing three more magistrates to uphold DAP, then he got it made.  He didn’t have to worry about impeaching them.  Which makes one wonder if this threat of impeachment is nothing more than a moro-moro drill to force the magistrates to succumb to political pressure.

With the recent pork barrel scandal in which three senators and 34 congressmen and other government officials are charged with plunder and graft in relation to the P10-billion that were pocketed with the assistance of Janet Lim-Napoles, P-Noy could be treading in dangerous waters.  Instead of laying siege to the Supreme Court, he should be prepared to accept the High Court’s decision on DAP.  It would make him a better man.  At this time in his presidency, he should demonstrate that he could be a statesman of the highest order and not the petty and vindictive politician that he’s being perceived to be.

(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)