P-Noy must choose principled men to get this country moving

Filipinos have a tendency to be timid and accept whatever comes our way. The que sera sera mentality must stop! How can this country move on if we continue to be complacent? Last week, the Judicial and Bar Council transmitted to Malacañang its list of nominees for three Court of Appeals vacancies, a lone Sandiganbayan vacancy, four vacant Antipolo Regional Trial Court and two vacant MTCCs in the same city. From this list of nominees, P-Noy will choose his appointees. Its about time we involve ourselves as citizens of this land and be on the alert to defend our nation against the possible dangerous enemies of democracy, decency and justice. Simply put, we need people to speak up!

The Constitution is the fundamental law of the land. As such, the country is governed by laws that should protect the rights of every individual. Despite the reinstitution of many procedural safeguards and guarantees when the 1987 Constitution restored the judicial system to what it had been in 1973, the slow pace of justice continues to be a major problem. It is said that in a democracy, the judiciary is the bulwark of liberty. It protects the poor and the weak against oppression by the wealthy and the influential. It protects the right to life, property and the pursuit of happiness against tyranny of violence, abusive power or unscrupulous ambitions. The Asian Human Rights Commission in a report stated that, “The government has not come close to providing what is required and urgently needed. How can justice be served, for instance, if investigations are flawed and defective?” The idea of a solved case is when the police have identified the suspects and filed charges in court, regardless of whether the suspects are arrested or the evidence they have gathered can be used effectively in court. It is also a common perception that it is not easy to get justice in the Philippines if you cannot afford to “grease the system.”

It’s crystal clear that the judiciary is jammed with mavericks who plague the courts with corruption and inconsistencies. This is why it is crucial that P-Noy makes the right decision in choosing his appointees to the judiciary.

Under the Constitution, it is the JBC composed of four regular members with fixed terms, three ex-officio political members (a Senator, congressman and the DOJ Secretary) and the Chief Justice as ex-officio chairman, that has “the principal function of recommending appointees to the judiciary.” It is from the JBC’s list of nominees that the president must choose his appointees.

The JBC’s nominees are supposed to have been screened, assessed and chosen for their competence, integrity, probity and independence – which are the qualifications prescribed by the Constitution for membership in the judiciary. To perform its task more efficiently and to insure quality nominees, in year 2000 the JBC issued a set of “Rules of the Judicial and Bar Council” prescribing criteria and guidelines to choosing respectable judicial applicants.

To determine integrity, which appears to be the most deficient among the Constitutional qualifications for members of the judiciary, council members are required to “take every possible step to verify the applicant’s record of and reputation for HONESTY, INTEGRITY, IRREPROACHABLE CONDUCT, and fidelity to sound moral and ethical standards.” For this purpose, “the Council may order a discreet background check on the integrity, reputation and character of the applicant and receive feedback thereon from the public, which it shall check or verify to validate the merits thereof.”

With its limited resources, the JBC cannot effectively obtain information on the conduct, track record, reputation for integrity and moral character of thousands of applicants for judicial posts nationwide. Thus, the Council devised a scheme, patterned after a system used by a judicial screening body in the United States, to source confidential information on applicants from judges, court personnel, prosecutors and lawyers where the applicants are stationed. Feedback on the applicants poured to the JBC. But to push for their favored applicants, certain Council members ignore contentious issues against their candidates – such men sow the seeds of discord. The President should have watchful eyes on them.

When the names of the JBC’s 13 nominees for the three vacant court of appeals posts were published in this paper, reaction from Bench and Bar, lawyers and business groups in Metro Manila (especially in the city known as the country’s Wall Street) – was very negative.

Commenting on certain nominees in the JBC list, a Metro Manila lady RTC judge, referring to one nominee she evidently knows lamented: “Do they know how corrupt and immoral he is?” Aghast over the nomination of this allegedly corrupt and immoral judge, the lady judge commented that “the nomination shows that in the JBC integrity is irrelevant.” It appears that in the city ( known as the country’s premier business district) where the nominee has been RTC judge for years – there is no judge, court personnel and practicing lawyer who does not know his honor’s “ways.” Otherwise said, the nominee is notorious.

During the previous administration, it was the unfit JBC nominees who were appointed – at the behest of influential archbishops, bishops, charismatic leaders, politicians close to the palace, business tycoons and the powerful INC. This is the reason courts, like the Court of Appeals, are infested with scalawags.

With several unfit nominees in the JBC’s inventory for the three vacant CA posts, Bench and Bar sources are suggesting that Malacañang should re-evaluate the JBC nominees for their academic and judicial track records, reputation for integrity in the places where they are stationed and their lifestyle. But palace functionaries who will re-evaluate the fitness for appointment of the JBC nominees must not have the same “Culture of Accommodation” of JBC members and must resist the importune of fellow cabinet members, congressional allies and influential power brokers presently getting appointments for their protégés in the executive department.

P-Noy’s campaign commitment of improving the justice system and his sincerity of purpose will be tested by the quality of his judicial appointees. It is his signature that is affixed on judicial appointments, not those of the JBC members.

According to an old Chinese proverb: “A journey of a thousand steps start with the first step.” P-Noy started with a good first step when he appointed Justice Sereno to the Supreme Court. Like his mother, President Cory, P-Noy drew from the private sector for his first appointee to the highest court of the land.

For the Court of Appeals, Sandiganbayan, the Court of Tax Appeals and the lower courts, he can take the succeeding steps to restore public trust and esteem in our judiciary now infested by too many losers who will continue to mutilate the system. This, P-Noy can do by having his legal team rigidly evaluate JBC nominees for integrity and competence. And as he makes his appointments, he should not succumb to the requests of political allies, power brokers and relatives.

As it is, P-Noy has already compromised himself on his appointments to several executive positions that have damaged his government. He just cannot do the same for his judicial appointments.