EDITORIAL - Security for VIPs

Following the killing of a judge in San Fernando, La Union on Nov. 5 for still unknown reasons, the Supreme Court is proposing the creation of a special group patterned after the US Marshals Service, whose members will be assigned exclusively to protect members of the judiciary. A bill supporting the proposal has been filed at the House of Representatives.

Mario Anacleto Bañez was the second judge to be murdered this year, and the 31st since 1999. While it is clear, however, that certain members of the judiciary can face serious threats to their personal safety in line with their work, this proposal must be seen in the proper context.

Judges aren’t the only ones who face death threats and are actually assassinated in this country. Similar threats are faced by lawmakers, local government executives, labor arbiters and other officials, journalists, environmental advocates, left-leaning activists and even priests. There are reports that several regional officials of the Bureau of Internal Revenue have been kidnapped for ransom in the past months. In the conflict areas of Mindanao, teachers are targeted by Islamic terrorists for hostage taking, rape and murder.

Why should members of the judiciary get special protection? It’s unfair enough that too many members of the Philippine National Police are deployed as personal bodyguards of government officials and even certain private VIPs who can very well afford to pay for their own security detail.

If bodyguards would speed up magistrates’ dispensation of justice, perhaps the proposal could become palatable to taxpayers. But if this measure would be passed, what would stop members of Congress from creating their own special protective force at taxpayers’ expense? Who decides which sector deserves more protection than others?

There are currently 2,561 trial judges, 15 justices of the Sandiganbayan anti-graft court, 70 justices of the Court of Appeals, nine in the Court of Tax Appeals and 15 members of the Supreme Court. How many marshals will be deployed to protect them?

The proponent of the House bill was quoted as saying, in explaining his measure, that “right now, every active judge is a sitting duck, with absolutely no protection whatsoever against potential attacks.” But the same could be said of a majority of the population. The proposed funding for this proposal is better spent in improving public safety measures in general. Every person in this country deserves protection from lawless elements.