To disrobe or not
I am torn between requiring our judges and justices to publicly reveal their Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth and giving them some privacy, allowing them to dispense justice without the additional pressures flowing from fears of retribution or manipulation.
On one hand, they are public officials. They are government servants. They draw salaries from public coffers. They aren't supposed to serve any mistress but Lady Justice. So where's the check on their fidelity going to come from if no one is scrutinizing their potential accumulation of wealth over the years that they are in service?
Sure, one might resort to spot checking the cars they drive and where they live. But that would take extraordinary resources, having to employ the equivalent of detectives on stake outs armed with telephotos and recording devices just to ferret ill-gotten wealth. I doubt our government has those at its disposal.
SALN's, however, are a quick, convenient way to spot check. They are snapshots afforded over the years, every year, of where the justices are in terms of their wealth. Are they soaking in it? Wallowing in it? It will be easy to come to a conclusion as to disproportionate increases, or suspicious gains. Sure, we probably will not see Hermes handbags, Cartier watches, or BenCab paintings declared in the SALN if they really wanted to launder cash, but hard assets will be easier to spot.
And, the beauty of SALNs is, they come sworn to by the justices. They, of all people, know the value of an oath. Since it's under oath, the SALN can then be used to trap them.
On the other hand, what might we unleash if these SALNs are revealed?
There are those with axes to grind against the justices. Not just personal enemies, but sore losers in court cases decided. If the particular justice came from a long illustrious career in the judiciary, the list of people with axes would be as long as that career. What could those sore losers do with the information?
Would they be able to stalk the justices as to where they live? Mount their own stake outs and threaten their lives as well as those of their families? Would they investigate all the transactions the justices have had, and use small inconsistencies to make mountains out of molehills, create a scandal, and engineer a publicity blitz so they can destroy their reputations and careers?
The potential damage is evident. Which is probably why the Supreme Court has taken the stance that it has, to not cooperate in the demands made for public disclosure. To hazard a hopefully educated guess, perhaps in their minds, the SALNs have been filed, anyway, and therefore the law has been complied with. There is no additional obligation to fulfill by further allowing members of the hoo-haa community further access to the intimate details of their lives.
Perhaps a middle road can be found. Would it be possible to allow just investigators appointed by the pertinent agency (the Justice Department?) limited and privileged access to this info? Then they can be given copies, allowed to digest them, and then they return everything after?
Or could the Supreme Court set up a joint committee with the executive branch, staffed by independent persons with stellar reputations from both branches, and give that committee the mandate to probe the SALNs? Then a joint report can be made, (or if there are disagreements, separate reports can be submitted). Meanwhile, the SALNs stay sacrosanct.
The clash between competing philosophies is evident. But the current fighting stance taken by the President against the courts may not necessarily lead to the best outcome. We should seek a solution acceptable to both, while respecting their differing goals.
- Latest
