The Lady With An Axe

                The double-edged sword of the Lady Justice symbolizes the power of reason and justice. It will break the chain of irrationality and cut the perpetuation of inequality. The sword will swing to protect a person of his right to life, liberty or property, but it can also be a tool to strike the heart of a man who disrespects the dictates of the law. Rather than being vindictive, its purpose is to preserve order and stability in social life, as anyone who wilfully crosses the border drawn by it is in danger of dealing the loss of his privileges and rights.

Now that the Senate is acting as a court in the impeachment case of the Chief justice, and that the senators have now become jurors by their own right, they must possess with no excuse the character of Justitia (the roman goddess of justice). As a political entity called upon by the Constitution to act on the merits of the case of an impeachable official, they must render justice, in accord with the moral force of observing the rule of law and the rule of reason. They must determine with all good fidelity whether or not the embattled official is fit to remain the office he holds. But unlike the lady justice, who decides without fear or favour, the senators are inclined in pursuing their political light to blend with the taste of the public, in order to secure victory when the kingdom of election comes.

The inconvenient truth would create the impression that the senators will be serving the whimsical desire and wishes of the public and in the abandonment of their sworn duty to do justice to the accused. In the light of this analysis, it is the people who are their master and not the majesty of the law. The fallen wings of justice and the death of truth is an imprint of an evil axe - public opinion.

Not Among Equals

The impeachment proceeding of the Chief Justice has marvelled every ordinary intellectual and the highly-legalistic observers. Since it is viewed by the many, the main actors –the senator-judges- must conduct themselves in a manner which partakes of cold neutrality, in order to avoid the evil suspicion of being bias to one party or another. Above all, they must speak with the resemblance of possessing wisdom and philosophy considering that they have been elected at large by the Filipino people. However, there was one senator-judge who bravely declared before the honourable impeachment court and before the entire nation to the effect that the senate sitting as an impeachment court is like no other, that being so, it can pass upon any matter and invoke its authority on it, regardless of any boundaries set forth under the constitution.

In other words, he gallantly aired his conviction that the impeachment court is supreme to that of the highest court of the land. Logic and reasoning will never subscribed to such proposition. As pointed by Fr Joaquin Bernas, in his article on the PDI 01/23/12, he states in part that “Incidentally, this is not a question of who, between the Senate jury and the Supreme Court, is superior. After all, the Senate jury is no other than the same upper house of Congress. The Senate jury is not a distinct body from the Senate but is the same Senate given non-legislative authority to be exercised occasionally. The three departments of government are coequal, working in coordination with each other. When faced with a situation in which they seem to appear to be an immovable force pushing against an immovable wall, what is constitutionally demanded of them is to look for ways of working together.” The rationale, therefore, would fall on the premise that the senate is a body given by the constitution the sole authority to try and decide impeachment cases and it is not licensed to venture in an expedition to any other branch of government without the sacrifice of the doctrine of separation of powers.

In an indirect democracy such as ours, we are supposedly ruled with statesmen who are equipped with reason and wisdom. While they may commit blunders in their acts, it must not be so gross as to view them unreasonable and ignorant. Having been reposed the responsibility of representing the people, they must act with the highest mode of intellectual propriety.

Levelling the interests

Our great Republic created a body of men that possesses the privilege to represent the people in its entirety, with no other duty but to speak the words of the people through an all-embracing law. These select few continue to occupy the limited 24-seat in the Senate. But, with the onslaught of an impending impeachment trial, is it within their capacity to decide a case for the cause of justice? Or would it be another game of numbers based on their political affiliation?

The Constitution reposed before the hands of the senators the duty of removing into office an impeachable officer for betrayal of public trust, culpable violation of the constitution, or other high crimes. In other words, the senators will be the grand jury who can call for the acquittal or conviction of an accused. Since they will be the judges for the fate of the accused, they must decide according to the dictates of justice and not to any promises whispered by a fanatic influential. To render a verdict, one need not possess the expertise or experience of a seasoned justice. It is only sufficient to evaluate the arguments and evidences presented, and base his judgment on the merits of the case. Needless to state, his decision must be in line with logical reasoning.

But in a country where every politician is hungry for political accommodation, where his interests requires him to secure re-election and where secret alliances  are only to be considered, there could be no fair justice for one who stands accused. As the stage is set for the impeachment trial of the Chief Justice, we are about to witness the kind of political animals this Republic has in its cage. And we must hope that the rule of law and justice will succeed; otherwise, this nation as a whole will fail.