The ideal senator

It was Senator Bam Aquino, 1, and UP Law professors, at last count, 5. With a firing squad of Law professors arrayed against you, what’s a (presumably) well-meaning legislator to do?

Bam Aquino found himself in hot water after opening his mouth and perhaps, saying what he thought top of mind. When queried about the possibility of arresting his colleagues Senators Bato de la Rosa and Bong Go, and delivering them unto the hands of the International Criminal Court, there to be tried for crimes against humanity together with their patron Rodrigo Duterte, Bam responded that “ideally”, they should be tried here by local courts, rather than by that tribunal. Here, as in the banana republic. The nation that was once, twice, and who knows, even more times, in the grip of a murderer.

What a backlash that triggered. There was Professor Gigo Alampay, who advised that it would have been better if Bam had stayed silent, rather than be seen as a senator instinctively protecting one from within their ranks. There was Professor Teddy Te, former spokesman of the Supreme Court, chiming in and wondering ruefully how it was possible for a “message-disciplined” communicator to be so distressing.

Professor Dan Gatmaytan went so far as to call it stupid (the reasoning, not the senator. You know us lawyers, we split hairs). Apparently, Bam’s reasoning was, a criminal trial is better here because the victims, families, and affected communities are likewise physically located here in the Philippines. Also, that “justice is more meaningful where the crimes happened”.

Professor Ruben Carranza likewise had to drop a sweet sarcastic aside, noting that “ideally”, the ICC didn’t need to exist. But yet, we do know that it’s right there, haunting the nightmares of Duterte die-hards while sweetening the dreams of the extrajudicial killing victims.

Well, I for one know I wouldn’t want to be jousting with these legal luminaries. Perhaps some reversal of gear is necessary, senator?

Most observers and supporters of the senator point to his use of the qualifier “ideally”. This is his purported recognition that if there were circumstances that allowed it, then a local trial would be his best case, except that, Bam similarly recognizes that said circumstances aren’t there. But the good professors aren’t giving him that flex, wanting nothing to do with this la-la-land perspective.

Which is somewhat a surprise. These professors are state university-bred, and might be expected to possess a much more nationalistic stance (“Filipino legal luminaries have the ability to do anything that foreign jurists can”). They are likewise tasked to shape young minds about the administration of Philippine justice, and dispense optimistic career advice about future legal practice to their adoring students. But nope, they aren’t in Bam’s quarter on this.

Probably possessed with a much more profound respect for today’s realities, the professors dismiss even the use of the ‘ideally” qualifier. The situation we have today is not ideal, so why even bother to dream up fantasy scenarios?

We can gather from this collective professorial outcry a shared diagnosis about the state of justice dispensation in this country. When you are powerful, and when you are rich, and when you have connections, and when you can hire the big guns, and when you can manipulate the system, justice is much more selective. It may even be denied.

I’m going to say it. This mental framework reflects the belief that it would take a much more systemic, deep-rooted change to society, to how we administer justice, before Bam’s ideals can be entertained. Or even uttered.

Just being real here, senator.

The way forward might be to hunker down and initiate those systemic changes. The perception of judges and justices being biddable (at best) has been pervasive. There are not enough judges, and the cases are disposed of so slowly, with litigants croaking before their cases are heard. There are rumors of the Legal Education Board being overhauled. The practitioners are unhappy about the continuing legal education requirements, and how they are enforced. And the list goes on.

Ideally? Please tackle those. Then it might be possible to have a conversation about ideals. We professors ain’t got stars in our eyes.