Let successor name next SC chief, Arroyo advised

Against all expectations, a close ally of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on Friday advised her to let her successor pick the new Chief Justice, even as the Supreme Court — amid legal debates — allowed her to do so. Former Cabinet Secretary Silvestre Bello III made the advice even as Malacañang fumed at the "Arroyo court" tag that its critics placed on the Supreme Court over its decision. “Kung ako sa lugar ni presidente, the more prudent and democratic way of resolving the issue ay ibigay sa susunod. She appointed all members of the Supreme Court. Payagan niya ang susunod na presidente mag-appoint ng next (Chief) Justice ," Bello, a former justice secretary, said in an interview on dzXL radio. (If I were in the president’s shoes, the more prudent and democratic way of resolving the issue is to let her successor choose the next Chief Justice. She already chose all 15 sitting justices in the high court. She should let the next president choose the next Chief Justice.) Bello is running for senator under the administration Lakas-Kampi-CMD party. Green light The Supreme Court on Wednesday decided to allow Mrs. Arroyo to choose the next Chief Justice. [See: SC allows Arroyo to pick next chief justice] In Malacañang, however, deputy presidential spokesperson Charito Planas lashed out at critics who said the decision may give the Supreme Court an "Arroyo court" tag. She decried critics’ fondness in putting Mrs. Arroyo on par with the late former President Ferdinand Marcos in appointing government officials. "Marcos’ rule was a 20-year dictatorship, so all appointments came from him. Mrs. Arroyo has been in power for only nine years, and who else can make the appointments other than her? Don’t compare her to Marcos. Marcos’ rule was authoritarian, we are in a democracy," Planas said in an interview on dwIZ radio. Besides, she said all appointees of President Arroyo are presumed to have their loyalties to their job and not to the one who appointed them. “Once appointed kayo ang loyalty ninyo sa position ninyo di sa nag-appoint sa inyo (Once appointed, your loyalties are to your posts, not to the one who appointed you)," she added. Also, she noted that the Supreme Court’s justices had shown their independence as some of them dissented with the majority decision. ‘Arroyo court’ Former Commission on Elections Chairman Christian Monsod had lamented that the SC decision showed the emergence of a tribunal "especially accommodating" to Mrs. Arroyo’s wishes. Monsod, a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, said the ruling was ambiguous because the 1987 Charter was clear on the ban on appointments by the President before a presidential election. "I was disappointed. I said, ‘This looks like a Marcos court, and now it’s an Arroyo court.’ They seem to be especially accommodating the wishes of the president. [Its] reputation and image has suffered a great deal," Monsod said in an interview on dzBB radio Thursday. [See: Christian Monsod: SC under Arroyo is like a Marcos court] "Now we have an ‘Arroyo Court’ that is especially accommodating to the wishes of the President. The reputation and independence of the Supreme Court has suffered a great deal. It’s a pity. They tarnished their image," he added. But Planas lashed out at the claim, saying it was "unchristian" to put a motive on every action of the president. "It is unchristian lahat na gagawin bibigyan ng masamang kahulugan (It is unchristian to do give a meaning on all the president’s actions)," she said. — LBG/RSJ, GMANews.TV