In a democracy, All Power Emanates From The People, So SC, “You Are Fired!”

Paunawa: Ang mga video clips na pinagsama sama ay galing sa mga news videos ng ABS-CBN, DZMM, at One News.

One of our priests, Fr. Ranhilio Callangan Aquino, asked “Who checks the Supreme Court?” in an Opinion piece in Manila Times.

https://elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocs/5/78198

He, too, could not say it out loud enough: that the Supreme Court Justices must be impeached!

How to Throw Shade

Watch ex-Justices, Constitution authors, political analysts, media, and lawyers show the public “How to Throw Shade at the Supreme Court“.

In asking the question, Father Aquino immediately began with “not to spite the court”, immediately reminiscent of political analyst Ronald Llamas using the lawyers’ disbarment-immune prefacing “respectfully“.

Ex-Justice Antonio Carpio called the error of the Supreme Court basic while Constitution author Atty. Christian Monsod called them out on its overreach. In the stature and claimed authority of the Supreme Court, these words kill – their lofty positions, public authority and worst of all, nation’s respect. Basic error means incompetence and overreach means abuse of power.

The Supreme Court exercises its power of judicial review in only two situations: (1) violation of the Constitution and (2) grave abuse of discretion.

Yet ironically, the Supreme Court itself collectively or themselves individually but unanimously committed grave abuse of discretion – as laughingly out loud alert to the public by college drop-out Llamas with cheering encouragement of taunts and jeers by DZMM hosts.

Among the lot who threw shade at the Supreme Court, Llamas in the closest to ordinary Filipino citizens who are the People of the Philippines from which all power of the government come from.

The rest of the dissenting voices represent prominent authorities from the co-equal branches of the government — incumbent secretary ex-Atty. Larry Gadon from the Executive department and congressman Atty. Leila De Lima of the Legislative Department — or worse, from their own ex-colleague Jusice Carpio and worst, from one of the very authors of the very Constitution that the Supreme Court claimed to ironically defend.

In her interview with another ex-justice Justice Adolfo Azcuna on One News’ The Big Story, celebrity veteran news anchor Ces Drilon quite professionally “respectfully“ — but, in real talk and real watch terms, a subtly controlled insult — called out the word of the day: ironically, to aptly describe the Supreme Court’s rationale of “violation of due process” in their unanimous decision.

That ex-Justice Azcuna prompted the irony:

(1) that the Supreme Court declared the House of Representatives violated the due process right to be heard of VP Sara Duterte but

(2) that the Supreme Court made their decision without giving the House of Representatives due process right to be heard too.

Such is a Big Story indeed. There is plenty more, if only a repetition of the same or similar sins of the Supreme Court. Citizen Llamas, quite impressively, called out the Supreme Court’s conflict of interest:

(1) that they themselves, individually, are impeachable officials and

(2) that they themselves, still individually but also collectively, do benefit from their own decision mandate which, under stare decisis albeit overreachingly imposed on co-equal Legislative branch, shall guide future impeachment proceedings.

But Leila was a wee bit scathing, even nearly saying directly what others couldn’t for fear of contempt — perhaps, because a few days of imprisonment is nothing compared to her seven-year government oppression. In translation, she declared the Supreme Court is not a court of truth and honesty but rather an undisguised shameless court of untruth and deceit.

Worse than whiffy scathing attack that still requires public construction (ie interpretation), akin to judicial construction, Gadon’s shade is witheringly figurative scorn and, more crucially, personal rather than official, speaking on behalf of the Executive department. In deeply damaging personal experience, Gadon was disbarred twice for being obnoxiously loud intemperate language and yet, he alerted us all, VP Sara Duterte was not disbarred for her crispy “fuck you” rant and alleged grave threats to kill. The evil of Supreme Court is magnified exponentially when it is personal.

The Shade Thrown By A Priest

Adding to the dissent is a voice from the church. Father Aquino himself declared widespread dissent: from government, media, the wider general public and now the Church. He emphasized two checks against the abuses of the Supreme Court:

(1) the Executive’s appointment power.

(2) the Legislative’s impeachment power.

The appointment power ensures that members of the Supreme Court are fit for purpose while the impeachment power ensures they are removed when they proved unfit for purpose.

He explored further checks:

(1) by the People of the Philippines expressing dissent despite threats of abusive exercise of contempt power of the court.

(2) by Congress to enact law that nullifies Supreme Court decision on Duterte vs. House of Representatives.

(3) by President Marcos to launch a fact-finding commission to investigate particularly the alleged misuse of confidential funds.

Father Aquino also broached the idea of revisiting the wisdom of an independent Constitutional Court separate from the three co-equal branches of government to adjudicate any justiciable issues on matters of the Constitution.

TRASH THE CONTEMPT POWER OF THE COURT

Of all the checks enumerated above, it is the so-called inherent contempt power of the court that must be abolished. Such power is a relic of abusive English kings born out of the time long gone in 1100s. Our laws were copied from the Americans’ who in turn were copied from the English’s. With that copy, our courts claimed that power for themselves, which is antithetical to fundamental principle in a democracy: that all power emanates from the people. The people never ever gave that power to the courts in the first place as early as democracy was born in 5th century B.C.

Think about it: why would all-omnipotent people ever think of giving the courts (or more correctly its judges) the power to imprison us, the people, when:

(1) We, the people, did not elect these Justices and judges.

(2) We, the people, elected the President who appointed them to positions of authority. Even the President who is a subject of vile attacks on social media does not even have the power to imprison us, the people.

(3) We, the people, have the fundamental constitutional right to free speech, which includes criticizing anybody in government including the SC Justices and their judges and said free speech trumps any contempt power.

While that power also survived in more mature democracies such as the US, UK and Canada, the democratic safeguards and democratically-mature citizenry in these more well-developed democracies keep that power in check to an absolute minimum. The Philippines, with its weak democracy afflicted by evergreen corrupt and abusive government, such contempt power is simply, plainly, incontrovertibly abused by power-corrupt and -hungry judges and justices. Take the case of Judge Ibay, which we blogged here in our advocacy platform:

2009: CONTEMPT ORDER NA IPAKULONG ANG DRIVER NA NAG PARK SA SPACE NI Judge IBAY

In this saga of abusive use of contempt power, the saga of baby touch and criminal impunity tolerated by the Supreme Court is globally documented Google Searchable forever.

Judge George Pantanosas ng Binangonan MTC Branch 2 at ang Abusong 5 Contempt Charges Kay Juan

Judge George Andy Pantanosas of Binangonan MTC Branch 2 issued five contempt charges against a Juan Dela Cruz including when Juan complained to the Supreme Court the incompetence of his own court office staff so that in his power comes too protecting his own people.

Or Judge Emmanuel Jesus Santos of Binangonan MTC Branch 1 who also issued one contempt charge against the same Juan above for being called “corrupt” based on his condoning the unlawfulness of Binangonan PAO representing Juan’s opponent who is not an indigent in the first place. Take a read on some of these abuses:

https://www.facebook.com/share/p/19g4SbSHCE/?mibextid=wwXIfr

https://www.facebook.com/share/12M9ut26N88/?mibextid=wwXIfr

More recently, this abusive judge issued another show cause order when Juan escalated to the Supreme Court the undisguised open bias and wilful violation of the law to favor the private complainants who are also government officials (ie Barangay Libid Chairman Gil Anore, Policeman Arnel Diocena and Streamson Tusi). One particular open gross defiance of the law and gross bias was when he unilaterally appointed the government officials as private prosecutors in place of absent prosecutors without the written DoJ authority as required by law. The abusive judge was even corrected by Prosecutor General Fadullon himself.

The worst of these all on Juans is that the Supreme Court condones and tolerates such rampant abuses with impunity. For real.

More crucially, contempt orders are always unjust orders. Unjust orders are crimes under Articles 204 to 208 of the Revised Penal Code. Judge Ibay, Pantanosas, and Santos and other judges were condoned with impunity by the Supreme Court, so forget about imprisonment. The Supreme Court protects its own. For real.

Surely, there are vast more unpublished cases of abuses by judges in using the contempt power of the court in imprisoning Juans and inflicting unspeakable harms (eg trauma, psychological/emotional injuries, financial loss, reputational damage, etc.).

And there is more! More egregious evil decisions of the Supreme Court. Take a look at our advocacy page:

Korte Suprema, Korte Problema

In sum, the Supreme Court must be held to account for its abuses. As Constitution author Christian Monsod urgently encouraged the public, an Ombudsman complaint to investigate Supreme Court Justices En Banc is in order. We will do one better. We shall make one and go to the House of Representatives directly ask Congressman Percy Cendana, surely he would jump at the opportunity.

In a July 2, 2024 article “The Supreme Court has made Trump ‘a king above the law’

https://www.newstatesman.com/comment/2024/07/supreme-court-donald-trump-king-above-the-law

the author said: “It is customary to sign off such opinions, ‘Respectfully, I dissent.’ Instead, Sotomayor signed it: ‘With fear for our democracy, I dissent.’“

We sign off ours as: “To the Supreme Court, with us, the People of the Philippines, being the all-powerful authority, we dissent and ‘you are fired!’”

---

#AbusoNgGoberyno