Posts
It is jolting to reflect on the corruption of the Judiciary even
though it can be everyday man’s assumption that our justice system
sucks. The poor have long experienced a different kind of justice for
them and a far friendlier one for the rich. That is nothing new and has
been a powerful issue used by the rebellion to recruit partisans. But
corruption is not about a rich-versus-poor scenario, it is the corrupt
for themselves against everybody.
From the onset, I had welcomed the impeachment trial of Chief Justice
Rene Corona. I have less interest in Rene Corona the person and much,
much more for Rene Corona as the personification of both the Supreme
Court and the Judiciary. It has been a keen interest of mine to have the
public eye focused deliberately to the corruption of the Judiciary
because it is the worst kind of corruption. And if others, especially
the Judiciary and the legal profession would like to make a counter
claim and deny the shameful level of corruption in their area of
responsibility, they may wish to look at how the Philippines can be
considered a corrupt country with one crucial branch not blackened as
well.
For over thirty years, when I am in the company of lawyers, socially
or professionally, corruption in the Judiciary and the legal profession
has been a given. It used to be that corporations would have legal
retainers on the basis of the relationships of owners of senior
management and lawyers or law firms. But it began to expand a little
when corporations would retain law firms with good connections to judges
and justices. The imbalance of the Judiciary in dispensing justice
warped even more when it went beyond the traditional difference between
justice for the rich and justice for the poor to justice that can be
bought.
Lawyers and/or law firms with good connections mean good connections
with judges and justices. It means that decisions can be unduly
influenced by relationships, for favors and for money. It means that
judges and justices can be for sale. With judges and justices selling
their decisions, there can only be corruption in the Judiciary.
The last discussion I had with a youngish lawyer in his 40′s produced
the same information as has been mentioned in the last forty years. He
said it is almost impossible for lawyers or law firms not to know a
dirty judge or justice, and that many of them allow themselves to be
used to corrupt those judges and justices in the interest of their
clients. After all, clients who can afford want insurance far and beyond
the merits of their cases. Why else are they looking for lawyers and
law firms with friendly ties to judges and justices.
This young lawyer said that lawyers like him who have not established
themselves are not in a position to risk their careers by exposing
dirty judges and justices. He said there is a government agency under
the Judiciary which accepts complaints against wrongdoing by judges and
justices. However, he would never go there because complaints are leaked
and the fate of the lawyer complainant is sealed – no more future in
his profession. He did say that some very well established law firms had
more leeway and courage to make complaints but they hardly do. Most
prefer to keep things quiet and enjoy their advantage over smaller and
newer law firms.
It was absolutely comical how many lawyers and law firms went to the
defense of a Chief Justice accused of betraying the public’s trust.
Corruption and protecting a former president anticipating plunder cases
against her. It was as though they were fighting for their king – and
they most probably think so. After all, Corona and his lieutenants act
as if he were the Supreme Court, as though accusations against his
character and behaviour are also attacks against the Judiciary.
Yet, the stained reputation of the Judiciary and its deteriorated
credibility does not seem to upset them at all. They have been acting as
though they are all in one clean branch of government and that the
President of a dirty executive Branch and members of a dirty Congress
had no right to think of their Chief Justice as unfit. They do not even
begin to wonder if there are more dirty justices, judges and lawyers
than dirty policemen by percentage.
The President was voted in on a platform of change, and change in a
very specific field – corruption. The President is trying to live up to
his promise and mandate. He needs the Judiciary to clean up. Without the
Judiciary, the President only has one option for reform – a
revolutionary government. What the President starts has to end with the
Judiciary, has to end with justice being dispensed with firmness in a
society long wracked by corruption.
Instead, Chief Justice Rene Corona and the majority of the Supreme
Court have been the biggest and worst impediments for PNoy’s
reform-focused government. It does not make it easier for the President
to push a reform agenda by going after the Chief Justice, but a Chief
Justice sneaked into his position around midnight forces a
confrontation. The two of them cannot co-exist in harmony unless both
agree to the cleansing of government.
The impeachment trial is not about Corona, it is about
corruption in the judiciary. I understand, therefore, why the Corona
cohorts in the Supreme Court who gave him a technical opening to be
appointed in the dead of night have to protect him, and one another. I
understand why judges and court employees have to defend one of their
own as though they are defending their way of life. I under why many
lawyers and law firms are totally uncomfortable with a President
challenging corruption in the Judiciary. After all, when judges and
justices do business with litigants, the lawyers are the usual
go-between, the negotiators, the couriers of cash or favors.
It is not easy to beat the system, even if that system is a cancer
that gnaw at the soul and nobility of the Filipino people. If we are
afraid to confront the cancer, we can at least ask, “How many dirty
justices, judges and lawyers are there?”
- - - -
Jose Ma. Montelibano Philippine Daily Inquirer Friday, March 9th, 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment