Scalawags beware
An exuberant "yes"! That's the mental shout-out all my synapses released when I read the headlines as to Justice Gregory Ong's dismissal this week by the Supreme Court.
Justice Ong has therefore been forever banished from the Sandiganbayan, his retirement benefits are forfeited, and he can never, ever take a position in the government again. What a glorious message to judicial scalawags from the Supreme Court!
Earlier this week, there was speculation as to the decision of the court, and I was getting pretty antsy. Rumor had it that the court was debating between total dismissal, a few years penalty, or even, as was bruited in the papers, a suspension for a paltry six months. I couldn't believe that temporary suspension was even on the table, considering the egregiousness of the offenses Justice Ong was accused of committing.
Let's see. First, he was accused of hobnobbing with Janet Napoles, the self-confessed conduit for billions of government funds funneled through fake non-governmental agencies. There was the partying and the schmoozing. Justice Ong even visited her offices!
Second, he was the judge actually in charge of the case against Napoles and her husband when they were accused of over-pricing Kevlar helmets meant for the military, allowing them to spirit military funds into their daughter's Jimmy Choo stilettos. How did that case prosper, you ask? Oh, just dismissal for Napoles. (Note, he is accused of taking bribes, but apparently the evidence wasn't sufficient).
Third, wasn't he also an appointee of ex-President Arroyo to the Supreme Court before the court barred him from taking office as he couldn't prove he was a natural born citizen? And this wasn't his first offense. He had already been suspended before for an impropriety in hearing cases.
So, you can imagine the indignation I was feeling when I was reading the theory that Justice Ong might only get a suspension. What's that, a slap on the wrist?
To top it off, Justice Ong even had the gall to submit a letter to the Supreme Court asking to be allowed to retire. The goal, I guess, was to give him a graceful exit, letting him fold his black robes with dignity while preserving all his accrued retirement benefits. That would have also paved the way, were the court so minded, for the court to, perhaps, dismiss his disciplinary case for being moot and academic.
But I couldn't really speak up and mouth off, not when the case was pending (sub judice). I could have been held in contempt or worse, subject to my own disciplinary proceedings had I gone forth and pontificated on what the Supreme Court ought and should and must do.
So, hallelujah! It turns out I would have been preaching to the choir, anyway, as the decision resulted in the very best outcome possible. Ever.
But it was still not a home run, apparently, as the vote was not unanimous. While 8 justices voted to crucify him, 5 justices were not of the same opinion. There were also 2 abstentions from former colleagues. Maybe this split vote was what had delayed the release of the ruling, but I am really glad it turned out as it did.
But never mind. This is still such a magnificent message from the court. It's loud and clear: corrupt judges better watch out. And such a pleasure to see the appointees of President Aquino (Sereno, Jardeleza and Leonen) squarely in the dismissal corner. My former professor, Justice Carpio, also voted to dismiss.
Slowly, gradually, even as the institution that is the judiciary remains tarnished by allegations and whispers of bribes, case-fixing, incompetence, and power plays, the new make-up of the court is making its potent presence felt. A few more cases like this, and I might even say we've reached a golden age.
- Latest
