Is the use of state resources to defend Leila De Lima from disbarment justified?

The last couple of weeks has seen Philippine President Benigno Simeon “BS” Aquino III leaning heavily on a number of key institutions and communities that provide important counterbalance to the power wielded by Malacañang. First it was the media, specifically veteran television news presenter and former Vice President Noli de Castro who President BS Aquino criticised for being too “negative” in the way he reports the news on his ABS-CBN news program TV Patrol. Now the President is bringing to bear the full resources of Malacañang’s legal team to bring back on track Phase II of his overall plan to effect full control over the Philippines Supreme Court having successfully effected Phase I — removal of former Chief Justice Renato Corona — in the first half of 2012.

President BS Aquino is now reportedly giving full support to the bid of Department of Justice Secretary Leila De Lima for the Chief Justice seat. De Lima is currently battling disbarment complaints against her mainly on the basis of her blatant defiance of a Supreme Court order and a host of other unsavory character traits that are relevant to any evaluation of her eligibility to take on the Chief Justice’s duties…

Leila de Lima is not what one would ordinarily consider “Supreme Court material.” She has not only demonstrated an utter contempt for anyone else’s rule of law, she’s proudly confirmed that as her view. In mindlessly serving as President BS Aquino’s attack dog her legal work has been sloppy. She’s a “gun hobbyist” like her boss, which I personally think puts her only a step or two above somebody like, say, Pol Pot or Vlad the Impaler on the scale of being creepy and dangerous. And perhaps most disturbing is the realization that the poor human rights reputation of the country might be directly related to having an unprincipled thug in a clammy ungulate suit serve as the head of the Commission on Human Rights for a couple years. No, this is not someone who projects the air of Solomonic judicial statesmanship that we imagine the occupants of the highest court in the land should have.

My colleageue Ben Kritz had a pretty compelling view on the merits of De Lima being “kicked upstairs” into the company of the country’s top legal minds who possess thinking faculties formidable enough to effectively put a check on the ogresque thoughts and actions of what by then will be Malacañang’s erstwhile “attack dog”. Compare that to the company De Lima currently keeps as a member of President BS Aquino’s cabinet — a bunch of bumbling bickering hacienda hangers-on who have, in the last couple of years, collectively failed to exhibit any semblance of consistent team esprit.

The only real issue here is the question of whether the use of state legal resources to defend De Lima in her disbarment case is justified. In my simplistic view, disbarment is a consequence of a lapse in professional judgment of a lawyer, which means that a case of disbarment is something that is solely between the individual law professional and the governing/regulatory body of said profession, in this case, the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP). As such, we then need to ask ourselves: Is it right to expect the Filipino tax payer to foot De Lima’s legal bill?

Then again, what else is there for Aquino’s cabinet to rally around beyond the only real point of this whole costly sham known as the Second Aquino Administration? De Lima will likely have one single marching order as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court — to secure the family jewels of Uncle Peping. That’s fair enough, I suppose. What else is democracy but a soul-less governance engine for churning out warm-and-fuzzy win-win outcomes: (1) from the “people’s” perspective, an illusion that they had exercised their “will”, and (2) from the politicians’ perspectives, a “mandate” to effect their feudal agendas.

It’s more fun in the Philippines because everybody wins!

print

21 Comments on “Is the use of state resources to defend Leila De Lima from disbarment justified?”

  1. De Lima is an asset of the state given the fact that she did not let Gloria escape the country because Gloria had Corona in the SC who is now impeached.

  2. @ fishball
    nag-iisip ka ba talaga? lahat na lang sinabi mong ideas ay sablay, walang tumama kahit na isa. may nakukuha ka ba sa kakasunod sa mga yan?

  3. @fishball

    De Lima is not an asset of the state. She is a liability not only to the state but to democracy and freedom. You are apparently defending the emerging dictatorship. You are a follower of the dictator wannabe.

  4. @ fishball

    I have been an OFW for a very long time, so it makes me an asset of the government, dapat gastusan din kaming mga OFW ng gobyerno. But last time i went home, nagatasan pa ako ng government natin ng about Php3000 bago ako nakaalis. Sagot….!

  5. Kung ang iba ang gagawa nya, lahat mag-uunahang sabihing walang delicadeza.

    Pero ngayong sila ang gumagawa, ang daming palusot.

    BS Pnoy, namumuro ka na!!!!

  6. leila delima is a maggot. she insults the supreme court and now she wants to be a chief justice?! now, what kind of dog is that? Leila de lima is a disgrace to whole of the legal progession. Like lacierda, they called the previous CJ, names and whatchucallit. Mga gago. Pulpol na mga abogado. Kaya kaming mga bisaya at taga Mindanao, gusto ng humiwalay. We are tired of Malacanang’ s bullshit. Makati Business Club lang ang nakikinabang. Curse Cojuangcos and the Makati Business Club. Ang saswapang ninyo hoy! Dito sa Cebu at Mindanao, hindi kami bulag. Alam namin pulpol kayo. Especially Presidente niyo. Pulpol na , gago pa.

  7. another bias article written by benign0. extrajudicial killings is directly proportional to the impotence of the courts.

    people kill with impunity knowing that they can get away with it.

    palparan, lacson, honasan, duterte, ampatuan, NPA death squads and others like them thought so.

  8. oopps. sorry about that benign0. this post was meant to your other article. but somehow this is relevant to your claim that we should be singing hosannah to the courts instead of allowing de lima to ‘pillory’ them despite their being upright and manned by highly competent people.

  9. Have they heard the word:”immorality”…De Lima has a Driver Lover. She is not married to her Driver Lover, and are sexual lovers. Can you imagine a Supreme Court Chief Justice living on that circumstances? De Lima must be debarred…

  10. Interesting fact: “Kicked Upstairs” as a trope (cf. TV Tropes article on Kicked Upstairs) refers to a promotion to a… nominal position, one with little to no power. One such example would be the transfer of an errant US Catholic bishop as fallout from the clerical sex scandals to a position in the Roman Curia with little to no influence and/or power.

  11. Apparently NO, Malacañang did all sorts of lobbying to reserve the top judicial post for her, even ignoring the constitution on the JBC composition. To say that the government have to shoulder the expenses for a case that it is not related to is too much. De lima, in a way, committed professional misconduct? Isn’t it that she is guided with underlying code of ethics in pursuing her duties? Committing violation on certain professional rules is the sole responsibility of the one who is practicing that profession, just like in the case of a jounalist who commits libel or a nurse who commits medical malpractice.

    1. What does PNoy think he is, the Constitution itself?

      Enter the Yellow Jackboot.

      On another note: I may be a gun enthusiast, but that doesn’t mean I’m qualified for political appointments. Even if, for example purposes, I am one of the Yellow Fuhrer’s “kabarilan.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.