Robredo's fear
SPEAKING recently at the Ateneo de Manila University, Vice-President Leni Robredo publicly addressed speculations shared by millions of Filipinos, that the current composition of the Supreme Court was friendly to the Marcoses, fueling talks she might lose to the dictator's son and namesake, in the latter's protest once it will be decided by the High Tribunal.
The fear is not without basis given the Supreme Court's history of friendly accommodation to influential litigants.
In the infamous case of Imelda Marcos vs. Sandiganbayan (G.R. No. 126995, decided on Oct. 6, 1998), Imelda, who was convicted by the Sandiganbayan of violation of the AntiGraft and Corrupt Practices Act and sentenced to a prison term of 9 to 12 years, appealed to the SC where its Third Division affirmed the decision of the Sandiganbayan.
Marcos, through her counsel Estelito Mendoza, filed a motion for reconsideration and referral to the full court.
As a matter of practice and policy, motions for reconsiderations are simply “denied with finality because of the SC Circular No. 2-89 which clearly states that the full court is not an appellate court to which decisions of the division may be appealed.” The High Court violated its own rules and Imelda's conviction was reversed by the court en banc by a 8-5 vote.
Atty. Estelito Mendoza's influence and dalliance with many SC justices that gave a black-eye to the High Court was again demonstrated in the notorious case of League of Cities of the Philippines vs. Comelec.
In November 2008, the Supreme Court ruled against the 16 municipalities because they could not qualify under the Local Government Code. Months after, the High Court threw away the first Motion for Reconsideration of the municipalities, represented by high-powered lawyer, Estelito Mendoza.
This time, the vote was 7-5. But one member of the court, Presbitero Velasco, (the same Justice who voted for the dictator's burial at the Libingan ng mga Bayani) switched sides, despite the absence of a new argument.
The decision had become final and executory and in May, the Court issued an “entry of judgment.” But in the week before Christmas, the new Court -about five new members came in to replace those who had retired – dumped the “final and executory” decision and replaced it with a new one in favor of the municipalities. Justice Velasco became the new ponente
The justices who voted for the Marcos family were the same justices who recently voted for the acquittal of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and the grant of bail to ex-senator Juan Ponce Enrile for “humanitarian” reasons.
What has happened to the Supreme Court as the “last bulwark of democracy”?-- from Democrito C. Barcenas