Don't pussyfoot JBC!

In this column last July 10 entitled “Screening the JBC,” I raised the possibility of the President disregarding a list of nominees prepared by the Judicial and Bar Council. Well, that possibility has turned into reality for last July 24, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita decided to return the list of six names that were recommended by the JBC (note that it was not clear in the letter if his action was done by authority of the President) as possible replacements for retired Justices Alice Austria-Martinez and Dante Tinga. In Secretary Ermita’s letter, he requested the JBC “to expand the list considering the importance and far reaching consequences of the appointments to the two positions.”

Secretary Ermita’s action generates several constitutional implications. First, it brings up the issue of whether the Office of the President has the power to return the list in the first place. The JBC’s main function is to screen and vet potential nominees to the Judiciary. Unlike the old system of subjecting judicial appointments to Commission on Appointments scrutiny, the creation of the JBC is supposed to minimize the politicization of the appointment process. Undoubtedly, the JBC was created to serve as a check on the President’s appointing power. Allowing the President to return a list of nominees prepared by the JBC would render inutile the very purpose for its creation.

Second, the independence of the JBC needs to be safeguarded. Not only is it a body specifically created by the Constitution, the JBC is also chaired by the Chief Justice. Moreover, it falls under the supervision of the Supreme Court which heads the judicial branch, a co-equal of the executive branch. With its independence at stake, query as to whether the JBC and/or the Supreme Court will pussyfoot and pander to the wishes of the executive?

Third, under Article VIII, section 4(1) of the Constitution, a vacancy in the Supreme Court must be filled within 90 days from the occurrence thereof. Since Justice Martinez retired on April 30, 2009, her replacement should be appointed by July 30. And since no appointment has been made as of today, query as to whether someone has violated the positive command of the law or that even the President has culpably violated the Constitution? Can her non-action be the subject of another impeachment complaint?

I do not know if the JBC expected the President to return its list. I am also not certain whether this situation has ever happened in the JBC’s 22 year old history. (There was a report that a list was also returned prior to the appointment of Justice Adolfo Azcuna but this has not been verified.) I would have thought that Presidential preferences would be whispered to some JBC members even before a list is finalized. That seemed to be the case as new names made it to the list for the first time. But that is water under the bridge. The question is what will the JBC do now?

*      *      *      *

Perfect Choice: Two centavos go to the board of the Asian Institute of Management (AIM) for choosing Dr. Edilberto De Jesus to be its next president. A seasoned educator, De Jesus brings the right mix of private and public, international and local experience to the job. Former secretary of the Department of Education, executive director of the Bangkok-based Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO), and president of Far Eastern University, he also taught at AIM for over 25 years. The latter experience should prove invaluable in his “discussions” to herd the professorial dons of the Institute. He picks up the work from where the ambassadorial former president, Francis Estrada, left off — to shake off the Institution’s academic cobwebs and intensify efforts to reclaim the reputation of being the top business school in Asia.

*      *      *      *

Right Call: One centavo goes to the National Telecommunications Commission led by FEU Law alumnus, Commissioner Ruel Canobas, for advocating a metering charge for mobile phone calls. Currently, consumers are charged on a per minute basis even if the actual call is only for a fraction of a minute. So, for a 10 second call, you will be charged for a one minute call. Under the new NTC directive, calls will be measured on a per 6 seconds basis. Such a move will certainly benefit the millions of mobile phone users nationwide and will hopefully placate Senate President Enrile regarding his vanishing prepaid load.

*      *      *      *

Nothing Lost, Something Gained: One centavo goes to Senator Ed Angara for authoring Senate Bill 904 which would disable an elected public official from running for another public office without forfeiting his current office. As discussed a few columns ago, the original rule under the Omnibus Election Code and exemplified in the case of Dimaporo v. Mitra was an elected official would lose his seat except if he ran for President or Vice President. So in the past, several senators ran for President and Vice President, collected campaign donations, lost, and then returned to the Senate. Instead of plugging this loophole, the Fair Election Act of 2001 removed the entire provision and as observed by the Supreme Court in Fariñas v. Executive Secretary, enabled any elected official to run for any other elected position without forfeiting his seat. So the bill of Senator Angara is a step in the right direction for it discourages political adventurism. But good luck to him in trying to convince his fellow Senators and members of the House of Representatives to support the bill.

E-mail: [email protected]