Overdue Sentiment on the SC TRO

Well, i do not know what's bugging me lately. I am not even sure what is making me feel bothered. I am not in my usual self for sometime now. Maybe, there are some things in my life are not just what I wanted them to be. Okay, enough of this being too emotional. I am returning for a "record" hiatus in blogging. Most of the time, lately, I am not in the mood or of "sound mind" to write and react about things. It takes concentration and inspiration to write. Yes, even on topics concerning the country! Otherwise, what you write may seemingly be worthless, lifeless, and nonconstructive. Oh what the heck, just write! Well, the topic I am writing on right now is quite overdue. But as a Filipino citizen, I am compelled to write on what I think about it. So here goes…

Issue at Hand: SC decision on letting GMA leave the country

Probably, the most famous term enshrined into everyone’s mind during the last two months of the year 2011 is “constitutional crisis”. The term was the product of former president GMA’s (Gloria Macapagal Arroyo) “botched” attempt to leave the country in a seemingly “urgent” fashion last November 15, 2011. This attempt to leave the country eventually created headlines of defiance almost immediately. (“Despite SC TRO, govt stops Arroyo from leaving PHL”) In an instant, the seemingly “benign” clash between two separate, co-equal branches of government – the legislative and the judiciary - rose to great heights.

I am not the one who you may say “intellectually inclined” with matters dealing with the law. But every Filipino with enough common sense to analyze things can conclude that the Supreme Court’s decision is indeed flawed. First, the SC issued the TRO beyond or near the end of office hours which gives the DOJ no or very little time to react.

Second, there are conditions that are needed to be met first for the TRO be effective. One of the conditions was not met - the appointment of a legal representative. (“ The petitioners shall appoint a legal representative common to both of them who will receive subpoena, orders and other legal processes on their behalf during their absence. The petitioners shall submit the name of the legal representative, also within five (5) days from notice hereof.”) On November 18, 2011, the SC by a vote of 7-6, found there was no sufficient compliance with the second condition of TRO. But the SC overruled its own set of conditions via a vote of 7-6 ruling that the TRO was not suspended pending compliance with the second condition.

Lastly, the dissenting opinions seemingly have more sense to the truth. GMA claims that she is ailed by a life threatening disease. Probably, the most compelling one is that of Justice Sereno. But I will only quote the honorable justice on some basic arguments. On her dissenting opinion, Sereno argued that “(GMA’s) own attachments belie the immediate threat to life she claims as one of. First, her own attending physician, Dr. Juliet Gopez-Cervantes, certified that petitioner should fully recover from her spine surgery in six to eight months, barring any complications.” In this sense, her condition will eventually get better (“fully” recover) and therefore is not life threatening. Also, in her itinerary, there are questionable countries of destination. As Justice Sereno pointed out: “If there is indeed some medical urgency and necessity for petitioner to travel abroad, these should logically be limited only to locations where she seeks medical advice from known experts in the field. Why then should there be other countries of destinations that are included in her travel authority but not specifically mentioned for purposes of medical consultations? What is the non-medical purpose of her visit to these other countries?” More surprisingly, GMA had intentions to participate in two conferences abroad during her medical tour. Will the conferences cure her of the said “life threatening” disease?

It is obvious in this case that GMA is in a hurry to leave the country for no apparent or clear reason – even her condition being life threatening is not clear enough! Her seemingly “staged act” to leave the country in a “dramatic” entrance to the airport does not have a convincing “telenovela” effect to win the sympathy of the Filipino people. I am not saying that she is guilty of the charges against her. But why leave the country in such a hurry? Face your charges. If you are not guilty of these charges, prove them in court. Be brave as you are when you were leading the country even if you were haunted by issues of legitimacy.