SC spokesman: TRO is for the best interest of ARMM

Contrary to what is being claimed by some Muslim groups, the Supreme Court's move to stop the synchronization of the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) with the 2013 mid-term elections does not aim to block efforts to implement reforms in the region. At a news briefing on Wednesday, SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez defended from the Bangsamoro Solidarity Movement (BANGSA) and the Minority Rights Forum Philippines (MRF Philippines) the high court's issuance of a temporary restraining order (TRO) that prevented the executive branch from implementing Republic Act No. 10153. The law defers the Aug. 2011 ARMM polls to May 2013 and allows President Benigno Aquino III to appoint regional officers-in-charge until the elections are held. At least seven petitions questioned RA 10153's constitutionality before the Supreme Court. Groups accused the tribunal of being “anti-Moro" and “anti-reform" when it issued a TRO last week. Marquez, however, said the groups should just wait for the SC to decide on the merits of the case. "I think they have misappreciated what the court has done," Marquez said. “The court has not yet ruled on these petitions. It was just to maintain the status quo. That is what the court would like to do pending resolutions of these consolidated cases." He said when the court issued that TRO, “it is for the best interest of the ARMM." Marquez also said that the SC may decide on the case before the month ends or in October. Holdover capacity The three-year terms of the incumbent ARMM governor, vice-governor, and Legislative Assembly representatives will lapse on Sept. 30, 2011. If the high court has not yet issued a decision before the month ends, the incumbent officials will retain their posts in holdover capacity. Government lawyers, however, said this is unconstitutional because the terms of local officials only last for three years. In their motion for reconsideration filed Monday, Office of the Solicitor General lawyers said the SC deviated from its previous ruling on the Osmeña versus Comelec case, where the SC held that a holdover by local officials beyond their fixed constitutional term is unconstitutional. "As pointed out by this Honorable Court in Osmeña, the term of local elective officials, except barangay officials, is fixed by Section 8, Article X of the 1987 Constitution at three years. Any law or act authorizing the extension of the term of said officials beyond three years by providing that said officials shall holdover until their successors are elected, is therefore unconstitutional," the OSG's appeal said. 2 different issues On Wednesday, Marquez said that the circumstances in the Osmeña versus Comelec case are different from the consolidated cases on the constitutionality of RA 10153. “Those are two different issues," he said. “There are grounds why it [holdover positions] was not allowed in that particular case [Osmeña versus Comelec]. In this particular case, this RA 10153, if they are saying that OICs aren't allowed, and holdovers are not allowed, who will govern ARMM in the meantime?" He likewise clarified that while the President is barred from appointing OICs in the region, the executive branch can still proceed with its selection process for applicants to the position of ARMM regional governor, vice-governor, and Legislative Assembly members. "What is being questioned is the law itself. I don't think the screening process for OICs is included in the law. What's included is the deferment, synchronization and appointment of OICs. The law never included screening process and so what is being restrained is the implementation of RA 10153," said Marquez. — KBK, GMA News