Pimentel welcomes term extensions for justices, judges

Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel Jr. welcomed yesterday the proposal to extend the compulsory retirement age of judges and justices from 70 to 75 years.

In the case of the Supreme Court, in particular, Pimentel said members of the High Tribunal should be allowed to stay on the bench longer so the nation could continue to benefit from their legal expertise and wisdom.

"The term extension for justices of the Supreme Court by itself is not bad," he said. "In the United States, there is no term limit for justices of the Supreme Court. That means they can stay in office beyond 70 years or until they are up to the job."

He noted that the absence of an age limit for members of the US Supreme Court was adopted based on the belief that their minds and sense of justice became sharper with age.

However, Pimentel said the proposed tenure extension was unlikely to take place because the moves to amend the Constitution would not push through so long as President Arroyo remains in office.

The proposal to extend the retirement age of the judges and justices was part of the draft Constitution formulated by the House of Representatives’ committee on constitutional amendments.

Malacañang and the House have been pushing for Charter change to pave the way for a change in the form of government from a presidential to a parliamentary system.

While a majority of House members seem to favor moves to amend the 1987 Constitution, the Senate has been vocal in rejecting the proposal.

Most of the senators generally approve of Charter change, but do not favor undertaking it at this time.

Pimentel said even many of the President’s allies in the Senate are against Charter change because they suspect the hidden motives of personalities pushing for amendments to the Constitution.

Meanwhile, Pimentel expressed apprehension over the appointment of retired Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. as presidential adviser on electoral reform.

"Davide may have good intentions for accepting the appointment, but I think this has put him in a bad light. The people would think that he was given a Cabinet appointment as a reward for past favors," he said.

"He should seriously think over the Cabinet appointment before making his decision. I think it is not only the reputation of Justice Davide but that of the Supreme Court as a whole that will be at stake here," he added. — Marvin Sy