Khan was compelled to explain because of the flap, no not just a flap but a storm whipped up by Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, who publicly said the Supreme Court may have committed an irreversible "judicial error" in the case, a statement similarly tinged with irony.
The Panganiban statement came on the heels of the move by the Philippine Congress to once-and-for-all abolish the Death Penalty Law, whose only casualty had been Echegaray, by lethal injection. The execution of others similarly sentenced had all been stayed.
No sooner had Panganiban spoken than the usual critics and enemies of government began demanding restitution for what they claimed had been a wrongful death. That, of course, is not exactly the case.
Panganiban can only speak for the Supreme Court on matters of policy and administration. When it comes to court decisions, the high tribunal, being a collegial body, speaks with one voice. Not even the chief justice can expropriate that right for himself.
When the decision was rendered to execute Echegaray, Panganiban, then still an associate justice, was one of those who dissented. He probably continues to dissent now. Whatever it is, that is his own position and cannot reverse what the Supreme Court, as a whole, has rendered.
There is neither any prohibition of dissent in the Supreme Court nor of its airing. The position of Panganiban has amply been heard. This being so, it becomes imprudent to continue harping about it in public afterward.
To do so is to risk casting dangerous aspersions on the integrity of Supreme Court decision. In a country where the Supreme Court is now one of just a few remaining institutions that people still respect, we need Panganiban doing a Raul Gonzales like a hole in the head.