The proverbial monkey wrench is thrown into the works. By an 8-4 vote, the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order against the appointment of OICs to replace elected officials of the Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao (ARMM).
The High Court is presently considering the constitutional issues raised by three separate petitions filed against RA 10153. The law, passed hastily by Congress at the behest of the Palace, postpones elections for the ARMM. In addition, the law provides for the replacement of sitting officials of the autonomous region by those to be appointed by the President of the Republic. The selection process for the appointees is currently in progress.
According to High Court administrator Midas Marquez, the restraining order was issued to prevent chaos and confusion that will surely arise should the Palace appoint replacements for the elective officials and then the law enabling that process is subsequently declared unconstitutional. That is certainly a prudent consideration.
With or without the TRO, the situation in Muslim Mindanao has certainly become tenser by the day as factions maneuver for control of the autonomous government. The other day, improvised explosives likely intended for the candidate-appointees were set off in Cotabato. Fortunately, the convoy that included DILG Secretary Jesse Robredo took an alternative route from where the roadside bombs were planted. Yesterday, another bomb was set off at the gate of the ARMM offices.
The building tension is not only between factions contesting the soon-to-be appointive posts. There is, likewise, increasingly militant resistance to the very idea of replacing the elective officials with appointive ones named from Imperial Manila.
The MNLF, principal signatory to the historic peace deal that paved the way for the establishment of the ARMM, decided to boycott the selection process on a matter of principle. The replacement of officials elected by the people of the autonomous region by officials named from Imperial Manila, they maintain, violates the spirit of the Organic Act and renders autonomy moot.
There are other voices, Christian and Muslim, simply run down by what appears to be the railroading of RA 10153. Accusations that the legislative process was leveraged by dangling pork barrel funds simply adds bitterness to the brew.
RA 10153 opens a Pandora’s Box in a region known for volatility and violence. We do not yet know all the malcontents that might be released if this administration pushes ahead with its poorly conceived design.
The petitions questioning the constitutionality of RA 10153, including the one filed by former senator Nene Pimentel, raise substantial points that will have to be carefully considered by the High Court. Judicious consideration requires time — precisely the commodity this poorly conceived design does not allow.
RA 10153 was passed only months ago, as Congress went into recess. The terms of office of sitting ARMM officials expire by the end of this month, just over two weeks away. Appointive replacements, according to this poorly conceived design, should be in office by October 1. Time is of the essence, and even before the TRO was issued, the administration has not moved as quickly as it should, considering consultations on the candidates began only days ago.
The petitioners asked the Court to rule on whether the Organic Act, passed by way of a referendum elevating it to constitutional status, may be superseded by ordinary legislative action. The Court is also asked to rule on whether, without the proclamation of extraordinary powers for the Chief Executive, elective officials may be replaced by appointive ones. That seems to run against the grain of popular sovereignty, an essential ingredient of our republican democracy.
In a word, RA 10153 is said to violate fundamental principles of our republican democracy. The Court is asked to overrule that law as a matter of defending the fundamental principles of our republican democracy against imperious acts by the Executive Branch.
These are, to be sure, weighty constitutional issues the Court must sort out in the most judicious manner. The poorly designed administration plan for postponing polls in the ARMM allows very little time for execution, considering this is a plan precisely vulnerable to constitutional controversy.
All things considered, the TRO remains the most prudent remedy to the situation.
Robredo, reacting to the TRO, declared the consultations process on the candidates will be put on hold pending a motion for reconsideration to be filed by the Palace. That is proper courtesy given the High Court, although the Court’s spokesman did clarify that the restraint was imposed on appointing new ARMM officials and not necessarily on the process of selection that leads up to it.
Palace spokesmen, of course, declared the executive branch will file a motion for reconsideration, although they did not address the fact that the TRO was issued precisely on prudential (not yet judicial) considerations. A motion for reconsideration, therefore, will require the executive branch to argue that continuing with the appointments will be the more prudential measure.
On the face of it, that line of argument will be odd. The TRO is akin to prohibiting traffic across a faulty bridge because of the perils doing so will court. A motion for reconsideration will basically argue that crossing a faulty bridge will involve less peril than not doing so.
Anyway, let the bright legal minds of the administration work that out.
At the moment, the operational political consideration is what happens come October 1. If the TRO stands, no appointment can be made. The extension of terms implied by that opens a new cluster of legal issues.
This mess just gets messier.