Babe's Eye View article

If there’s anything this impeachment process against Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez will do, it will put to the test once again the integrity of the Constitution. People on both sides of the spectrum should carefully watch the proceedings to see if, in fact, the checks and balances work. Whatever the outcome is, we certainly hope that this time there will be no “abortion” like what happened in the 2001 impeachment of Joseph Estrada—an event which many people have since regretted and have concluded as the reason why we are in this situation today.

It is clear the separation of powers between the three co-equal branches of government—namely the Executive, the Legislative and the Judiciary—was instituted to ensure checks and balances that would prevent one branch from abusing its authority and infringing on the functions and powers of the others. The Judiciary is considered by some as having the least weight in terms of political clout and financial muscle but lately, it has been acting “supreme” on many issues like supposedly infringing on the impeachment powers of Congress, prompting Ilocos Norte Congressman Rudy Fariñas to threaten another impeachment proceeding against eight Supreme Court justices.

The selection of the Chief Justice, as well as the other members of the Supreme Court, is a very critical part of the Constitution because for all intents and purposes, the Justices are the supreme guardians of the Charter and technically can interpret the law any way they wish without question. Under the 1987 Constitution, it is the President who has the prerogative to appoint the members of the Supreme Court, the Chief Justice and the Ombudsman who, unlike Cabinet appointees, have fixed terms and do not have to go through a confirmation process.

It is absolutely necessary for the Judiciary—and all related offices therein— to be deemed apolitical, able to make fair, objective and impartial decisions based purely on evidence, following duly-constituted legal proceedings. Ours is supposed to be a government of laws and not of men—and deviating from this dictum could have regrettable consequences, as recent history has proven. The disruption of Estrada’s term through EDSA II (described by Time magazine as a “mob rule”) resulted in a nine-year term for Gloria Arroyo, giving her the opportunity to appoint almost all the members of the Supreme Court.

So now we have this public perception that the SC is an “Arroyo court” an opinion that the remarks of SC spokesman Midas Marquez inadvertently reinforced in an apparent reaction to the threat of Congressman Rudy Fariñas to file impeachment complaints against the associate justices who granted the petition of Gutierrez to stop Congress from hearing two impeachment complaints against her last year.

Because of this perception, fairly or unfairly, Merci is now at the mercy of these politicians, primarily because she is an “Arroyo appointee”—making her, in the eyes of some people, “guilty by perception and by mere association.” Merceditas Gutierrez has been in public service for over 40 years and has never been tainted by corruption. She believes she has done nothing wrong. More than ever, Ombudsman Gutierrez is ready to fight it out to prove her innocence.

But more importantly, what everyone should wait for is to see whether the Constitution in this country works or not. Many of Merci’s supporters believe she should not be goaded into resigning and instead, should go head-to-head against the “honorable” congressmen—especially those whom she claims have an axe to grind against her because of pending cases before the Office of the Ombudsman. According to her, they are all eager to replace her with a “friendly” appointee.

The big question this coming May is: Will the Senators particularly those from the Liberal Party be fair and objective, especially in light of the revelation that President Noynoy Aquino has given his party mates marching orders to “get” Gutierrez? And what if the Ombudsman asks them to inhibit themselves from the proceedings because their objectivity could have been clouded since it has apparently become a Liberal Party imperative to get rid of her?

After all, the impeachment is really a political process whether people admit it or not and definitely, this should not be an excuse to railroad the proceedings like what happened in the case of Erap, where people saw then-Speaker Manny Villar hastily banging the gavel in his eagerness to transmit the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. No matter what Joseph Estrada says, the fact is he has never really forgiven Manny Villar for that. He finally got his big revenge when Manny lost in the last elections. Erap proved his point with over nine million votes against Villar’s five million votes.

Merceditas Gutierrez is hopeful that a majority of the senator-judges will be independent minded and will decide based purely on evidence, and not according to emotion or persuaded by biased public perception. Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile who will be the “presiding judge” has given assurances of their impartiality, saying they will not be influenced by anything or anybody as senator judges and as such, will be performing a quasi-judicial function.

A seasoned analyst told us this will be a major test of the country’s political maturity. Merci’s accusers must therefore prove beyond reasonable doubt that she is guilty of all the accusations leveled against her. But if it turns out she is not, then by all means she must be acquitted regardless of popular sentiment. Filipinos by now should have learned from the painful experience of the past and not resort to shortcuts once again. We must allow the system to work.