Why President Aquino is right to push back against the Supreme Court Posted by Joe America on August 20, 2014 · address to nation re DAP July 14, introducing the subject of judicial overreach Context is everything. When we want to judge something accurately, we need to get the context right or we are likely to end up with the wrong judgment. I think that is broadly what has happened regarding President Aquino’s “push-back” against the Supreme Court on the Court’s DAP ruling. And his comments about a second term. A whole lot of people are getting the context wrong. DAP means “Disbursement Acceleration Program”, which in turn means jump starting the economy by redirecting unused or poorly used funds to good uses. It does not mean accelerating money into legislator pockets. That abused practice is called PDAF. People are reading the context of the President’s push-back as political. The most extreme views hold that Mr. Aquino is trying to consolidate power as a dictator. He wants to spend money with impunity, knock the Supreme court back to impotence, and establish himself as ruler for life. That is the extreme version of the criticisms that have arisen, mainly espoused by crooks, political opponents and leftists. Other views . . . even from the President’s backers . . . are not that extreme, but are on the same “politics” path, one that perceives an overabundance of authority and even arrogance arising from President Aquino’s recent acts and statements. But what if those observations are wrong? What if the context, the framing, used by critics is wrong? What if “power for the sake of power” as the context of the President’s remarks is completely wrong? What if politics has precious little to do with the President’s push-back? What if the ACTUAL framing is good works for the good people of the Philippines? Then it is the critics who are as wrong as wrong can be. And they risk taking the entire Philippines down the wrong path, one which inevitably leads to great damage. And moving backward. Wrong context. Wrong decisions. What we have here is a confluence of forces merging toward a crash point. Here are the forces now joining: A president set upon getting the Philippines on the right track, clean of corruption, enlarged of economy, reduced of poverty. Defended from China. Peaceful in Mindanao. Better of infrastructure. Investing in programs to help the poor. A group of people offended by the President’s acts. They object about projects cancelled, or friends jailed, or political causes threatened. A Supreme Court feeling independent, very independent, wholly separate from the other branches of government. A legalistic chewing machine that reads the words of legal documents but is deaf to the overarching intent of the Constitution – to take care of the nation and its citizens. A Constitution bound in legalistic details written in 1987 by a group of esteemed people who could not see the consequences of the confining words they were putting into that document. Their words were written to confine a dictator’s bad choices, and inadvertently tied the hands of a president trying to do good deeds. A Congress that is being marginalized by Executive power and favor, by a Supreme Court that re-writes its arduously crafted laws line by line and by a public fed up with crooks in the Legislature. The solons need a target to vent at, and the Supreme Court may become that target. So on one side of the divide we have a Constitution bound in 1987 thinking, fresh off a dictator, along with its interpreter, the Supreme Court, which evidences little Jeffersonian conceptual awareness about what its legalistic rulings are doing to the nation and to the powers of Congress and Executive. On the other side, we have the President who wants to do good works and is among the few who see what is happening. His constructive efforts are blocked by the Supreme Court’s locked in, defensive, legalistic barrier. He has been joined by legislators who have about had it with narrow-thinking activist judges who hold themselves above checks and balances (i.e., the Court maintaining its own discretionary fund while outlawing those of the Legislature and the Executive). The Court’s DAP ruling was a huge ruling, make no mistake about it. And coming directly toward the Supreme Court are two more nation-defining rulings: Visiting forces agreement, which determines if the Philippines has a legitimate fighting force on its soil or not. At a time when its oceanic territory is occupied by China’s fighting forces. Bangsamoro agreement, which determines if the Philippines has peace in Mindanao and the framework for building an economy there, or continuing destructive bloodshed and a tattered Mindanao economy. The Supreme Court will have, within its hands, the ability to assure China’s continued encroachment into Philippine Seas. The Court will have, within its hands, the ability to assure that bloodshed and economic malaise continue in Mindanao. Those are the outcomes if the Court continues its narrow legalistic rulings, as it did with DAP, that the President is not entitled, under the Constitution, to take acts that benefit the nation. The President calls it “over-reaching” when the Court intrudes into Executive decision-making. And that is EXACTLY what it is. I go further. I call it insane when the court is busy looking at words stripped of any relevance to “good faith or good intent”, thereby completely missing the reason the Constitution exists. And the leadership role Executive is MANDATED to take under that Constitution. The Court needed to get knocked back. But I sense from the various defensive complaints emerging from Court spokespeople that the Supreme Court is not listening. That the Court is just another 100 percenter, a body that is more interested in defending its acts than doing what is best for the nation. The forces are coming together on three absolutely critical issues: How to build the Philippine economy forthrightly (DAP). How to defend the nation from an intruder (visiting forces agreement). How to find peace and some measure of prosperity in Mindanao (Bangsamoro agreement). The Supreme Court set a precedent with DAP in saying “you can’t do those things because the Constitution does not provide a basis for them . . . even if they benefit the nation.” Huh? Either the Constitution needs to be thrown out, or the Court does. How does Executive execute if it is held to a 1987 frame of mind? If Executive can’t defend the nation? Or work to find a successful peace in a complex arena where so many other nations are failing? Or can’t do all that can be done to help the poor? The President seems to me to be about the only guy around who gets the real picture. Because he is RESPONSIBLE for it. The judges are not. But they can, by interpretive ruling, destroy the President’s important works. The context for the President’s fight with the Supreme Court has nothing whatsoever to do with politics. That reading is the typical, emotional, self-serving, untrusting, baseless reading provoked by a tabloid press and some loud people who are antagonistic toward Philippine stability and well-being because of personal interests. It’s time for people, and “the people’s” leaders, to wake up and think right. Get simple and get the context right. Try this context on for size. It’s the one you used when you swept Mr. Aquino into office: President Aquino is working earnestly to do good deeds for the good people of the Philippines. Leaders of “people power” are making a mistake if they can’t grasp that they have a President who puts the Philippines above politics. They need to wake up to what happens if Executive and Legislative powers are eviscerated by a narrow-visioned Supreme Court. If the economy languishes. If China is not countered. If Mindanao reverts to violence. You see, unfortunately, it is the people who will bear the pains brought on by decisions flowing from a really bad contextual reading. Get the context right and the right decisions will be forthcoming. That applies to the Supreme Court which needs to consider constitutional intent, broadly, and not words, narrowly. And it applies to people-power leaders who need to consider the best interest of the people, not deeply ingrained suspicions of the nation’s leadership. Get it wrong, and woe to the Philippines. UPDATE 8/21/14 The following article illustrates how Supreme Court decisions have very real negative impacts upon efforts of Executive to move the nation forward: “SC blamed for looming power crisis”, Inquirer.net, 8/21/14/ The Supreme court gets a “freebie” on accountability, but Executive does not.
Posted on: Tue, 02 Sep 2014 15:09:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015