CJ Art and Tony Blair
When the idea of staging a Leadership Conference Series first came up, we already anticipated the usual wisecracks like “Why pay an arm and a leg for these imported international speakers when there are many Filipinos just as good, if not better?”
There is no disagreement that there should be some exemplary leaders out of 90 million Filipinos, otherwise we’re doomed. This is why for Parts 1 and 2, we’ve invited the best local leaders to share their experience and expertise alongside the global mentors. Not only is cross-pollination a sound scientific theory, it is the process that expands horizons and minds.
There are two Filipino leaders who will share the podium with former Prime Minister Tony Blair. They are former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban and Lamoiyan CEO Cecilio Pedro. Both more than fulfill and live up to the leadership principles they espouse. One will provide the perspective as a public servant, while the other tackles the private sector. Both are celebrated not only for excellence in their fields, but also for their ability to communicate — even mesmerize — their audience.
First, let’s talk about CJ Art, as he is fondly called. What most people don’t know is that before he joined the Supreme Court, he was a professor, banker, consultant for the World Tourism Organization and an honorary consul. He was also the only Filipino appointed by Pope John Paul II to the Pontifical Council for the Laity. Of course, his major accomplishments were in the field of law. He was legal counsel for the Liberal Party and the Manila Archdiocesan and Parochial Schools Association. Atty. Lorna Kapunan, who once worked with him as co-counsel, describes him as a “formidable litigator.”
His colleague, Justice Antonio T. Carpio, calls him “the most prolific writer of the Court, bar none.” He wrote around 1,200 full-length decisions and separate opinions, many of which had jurisprudential value and far-reaching effects for the nation; more than 100 separate opinions eloquently conveying his convictions and ideals; and countless resolutions disposing of cases. He penned landmark decisions that include the Cocofed case, where the Presidential Commission on Good Government was given the right to vote sequestered United Coconut Planters Bank shares acquired through coco-levy funds. Under his magistracy, he wrote 11 books — one for each year of his tenure. In Liberty and Prosperity, his valedictory tome, he expounds on his core judicial philosophy and vision for the judiciary: to safeguard the liberty and nurture the prosperity of our people under the rule of law.
Indeed, if a man is the sum of his experiences, then CJ Art’s cup runneth over. He has never been known to run away from challenges and controversies. And he has had his fair share.
In his book Reforming the Judiciary, CJ Panganiban recounted that on the morning of Jan. 20, 2001, militants threatened to march to Mendiola to force Estrada to step down. A clash with Estrada supporters who were encamped there was likely since the government machinery had collapsed.
He worried that VP Arroyo could not act while Estrada was still the legal leader. A coup d’état might erupt, undermining the constitution. He concluded that “the only way to avert violence, chaos and bloodshed and to save our democratic system from collapse was to have Mrs. Arroyo sworn in as acting president. After prayer and reflection, I summoned the courage to call up Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. at about 5:30 a.m. to explain to him my apprehensions. I proposed that, to save the constitution, he should swear in GMA by 12 noon. Arroyo became president that day.”
When the question of her legitimacy arose, Davide and Panganiban inhibited themselves from the Supreme Court proceedings. On March 2, 2001, the court voted 13-0 to uphold Arroyo’s ascension to the top post. A month later, the court again voted 13-0 to deny with finality Estrada’s motion for reconsideration.
When CJ Davide retired in December 2005, Justice Panganiban was named Chief Justice. There were innuendos that his appointment was a reward from the Palace for his role in EDSA 2, but all these died down as CJ Art acquitted himself with his program for judiciary reform and the independence and wisdom of his decisions.
In June 2006, the Supreme Court affirmed the death penalty imposed in 1998 on Leo Echegaray, a convicted rapist. He was executed the following year, the first execution since the Marcos regime. CJ Panganiban, known for his anti-death penalty views, opined that the Supreme Court might have committed “a judicial error” as not all of the qualifying circumstances needed to promulgate a death conviction were actually established. His remarks, made soon after Congress passed the law abolishing the death penalty, were criticized by death-penalty advocates and media. Some quarters even demanded that the family of Echegaray be indemnified.
This encouraged supporters of former President Estrada to push the Supreme Court to correct its 2001 decision upholding the GMA presidency. CJ Art subsequently issued a statement that his remarks on the Echegaray decision were his own personal views.
In his regular opinion column, “With Due Respect,” CJ Art pulls no punches. He gave a stinging opinion on the ruling that Secretary Romulo Neri could invoke executive privilege to evade three key questions on the National Broadband Network (NBN) scandal. He pointed out the seeming capitulation of the Supreme Court to the Executive and its incursion into the authority of the Senate.
True to form, in an opinion piece entitled “Arroyo Supreme Court?,” CJ Art did not mince words, stating that the majority decision contained in the ponencia of Justice Teresita Leonardo de Castro and concurred by Justices Renato Corona, Dante Tinga, Presbiterio Velasco Jr., Antonio Eduardo Nachura, and Arturo Brion “failed to check presidential abuse; worse, it imprudently expanded executive privilege to cover wrongdoings.”
He agreed with Chief Justice Reynato Puno’s dissenting opinion: that it was hard to hide the Palace influence, criticizing the use of “mostly baseless and inapplicable precedents and reasons to back up the decision of the majority of the Justices.”
He noted that to justify Neri’s refusal to answer the three crucial questions related to his discussions with GMA on the kickback-rich NBN deal were deemed as privileged conversations that took place in the performance of her duty. He also referred to Executive Secretary Ermita’s claim that Neri’s disclosures might impair the country’s diplomatic relationship with China as “proof-less.” This baseless claim was upheld as “Grade A” evidence to justify a big criminal cover-up by GMA and her aides.
He cited Senate vs. Ermita, which places the need to prove the necessity of secrecy on the Executive. “Disclosure is the rule because the Constitution expressly mandates transparency and accountability for all officials.” Executive privilege was not expressly provided in the Constitution while the power to investigate in aid of legislation is expressly granted to Congress. “In a clash between these two prerogatives, the choice is clearly in favor of the express grant,” wrote Panganiban.
As the former head of the tribunal, Panganiban lamented the missed opportunity to assert the independence of the Supreme Court by leaving a legacy of issuing a landmark decision. The high court will be measured by how it will be remembered by the people.
“An epochal Supreme Court is endearingly named after its chief, like the Davide Court. But when it unduly legitimizes kingly excesses, it is derisively named after the president it serves, like the Marcos Supreme Court. It must quickly choose what it wants to do. Is it to serve or to check President Arroyo?” he challenged.
In her efforts for political self-preservation, she has given her best to influence all who are willing to be co-opted. Giving in further eroded the people’s hope for a decent government. The SC, which is placed on a pedestal in terms of public respect, should be above all the political rot that has been the hallmark of this administration.
The fearless views expressed by CJ Art demonstrate the hallmarks of an authentic and ethical leader. That is why he should be heard with Tony Blair.
* * *
Share your views at ms.comfeedback@gmail.com.
