A probable breach of the rule of law

Amongst the most-used term in a social discussion of public events is “Rule of Law.” In discussing issues affecting society, people cannot evade saying “the rule of law has to be followed” as if everyone understands it as lawyers do. Unfortunately, many of us who belong to the intellectually less-profound class have to grapple with the facts before we discern their relation enough to judge the application of the Rule of Law.

Quite frankly, I could not get hold of a definition that might be useful for this article. My usually reliable and cherished copies of the Constitutional Law books didn’t define this very term in the context that I attempt to write this article. Chief Justice Enrique Fernando, though, provided a useful thought. He said that due process “is responsiveness to the supremacy of reason, obedience to the dictates of justice.”

Last Monday, the office of Vice Mayor Rama, called me to break bread with his friends. I was honored. Normally, I politely refuse because I, in my modesty, am quite uncomfortable rubbing elbows with society’s who’s who. The thought that he invited me as a return favor of a previous column, “Demolition job” flashed through my mind. But, out of respect, I went to see him.

While eating lunch, I learned that Mayor Edgardo Labella, issued a memorandum to Rama, calling for a special session scheduled the following day, Tuesday. The memorandum reached Rama’s office few minutes before noon. While I didn’t read it (tungod kay wa man ko’y labot), I noticed it generated a little buzz. Responsible personnel talked in hushed language. I could discern that their whispers revolved around the time the memorandum reached Rama’s office. Rush was getting to be the new normal. Accordingly, there were other papers that were logged “received” beyond office hours and could no longer be responsibly acted on. Considering that City Hall was supposedly open to transact business only half of that day, still, Rama’s office had few minutes to do what was ordered.

This is where a quick discussion on the Rule of Law fits in. The meeting, called by Labella, was set for 9 a.m. on December 23. I heard that in the internal rules of the City Council, a mayor’s call for a special session should be issued 24 hours before schedule. There are obvious reasons for rule, among them, to allow councilors to prepare, attend, and participate in the discussion. A kind of legal cloud hovered over the session. The good thing is that while legal purists might think holding the special session violated the house rules, it was up to the city council to decide.

What would add as a legal crucible to the holding of the special session last Tuesday was an earlier declaration by Malacañang that December 23 was a non-working legal holiday. In other words, government offices would be closed that day. How would a city mayor’s memorandum countermand a presidential order?

Here is my worry. The special session was called to declare a sitio in the south district in a state of calamity as a result of a conflagration. With the declaration, public funds could be used to help fire victims. But, if the session could be declared illegally convened, following the conceptuation made by Fernando, the validity of whatever monetary appropriation released by the city would be tainted. In the Anti-Graft and Corrupt practices Act, such expense wouldn’t follow the Rule of Law, therefore be deemed as a misappropriation of public funds and consequently, criminal. OMG!