NP senatorial bets ask SC to reverse decision on chief justice issue

The Nacionalista Party’s senatorial bets on Monday asked the Supreme Court to reverse and set aside its earlier decision allowing President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to appoint the next Chief Justice. Lawyer Adel Tamano, Reps. Satur Ocampo and Liza Maza, former labor undersecretary Susan Ople, Gwen Pimentel and former Cavite Rep. Gilbert Remulla also appealed to the High Court to declare that the prohibition against midnight appointments extends to the judiciary. Besides the motion for reconsideration, the group also filed a motion for intervention, which would allow them to intervene on the matter since they were not among the original petitioners. In their nine-page motion for reconsideration, they insisted that Article VII Section 15 of the 1987 Constitution is clear that the judiciary is not exempted from the prohibition. The only exceptions are “temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies will prejudice public service or endanger public safety," the senatorial bets said. “There is nothing in the said provision which exempts the judiciary from its coverage," they said, adding “where the law is clear, there is no room for interpretation. The courts must apply the law not as they think it ought to be but as they find it and without regard to consequences." Discussions in the decision of the High Court failed to consider the clear intent of the framers of the Constitution and instead adopted a narrow interpretation of the two provisions resulting to an absurd conclusion, they said. “Hence, it is not surprising that a lot of people especially from the legal profession, consider the decision to have been tailor-fitted to suit the interests of incumbent President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, who is widely suspected of plotting to extend her term or at the very least, to perpetuate herself in power," they said. They added there is no urgency nor constitutional infirmity for the president and even the next president to appoint the next Chief Justice. “There is not even a concern or problem with respect to the present case regarding the retirement of Chief Justice Puno on May 17, 2010 as the new president will have sufficient time within the prescribed 90-day period to make the appointment," the petitioners said. They said there is really no vacuum in the SC because the most senior justice may be appointed as the Acting Chief Justice. They added there is no danger of not having a permanent Chief Justice for the meantime because the SC, a collegial body, will not be affected by the absence of a permanent Chief Justice. “If the Constitution recognizes the possibility of having an acting president, intervenors find no reason why there cannot be an acting chief justice," the petitioners said. “Intervenors passionately believe that the decision fails to live up to the above ideals and standards," they said. “Hence, this motion for reconsideration to implore upon the justices of the Supreme Court to take a look at the present matter one more time and ask themselves if the decision serves the interest of the sovereign Filipino people. If not, a reversal of the decision is in order." - RJAB Jr., GMANews.TV