“The only problem is that a good man like a hard case makes a bad justice – a chief justice at that.”
Now that the chief justice had been impeached, there has been a deluge of notable names being touted as the next chief justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.
The names of Gilbert Teodoro, Miriam Defensor Santiago, and Frank Chavez are some of those being mentioned. Teodoro is a cousin of president Aquino and was a candidate in the last presidential elections; Santiago is a senator who figured prominently in the impeachment of chief justice Renato Corona and a former judge; and Chavez is a prominent lawyer and former solicitor general.
The list of names is long and more are coming.
This is unprecedented and there has not been any time in the history of the judiciary when the vacancy of the office of the chief justice has been too roseate and too loud with too much of media frenzy.
Former chief justice Corona’s recent impeachment which declared him guilty of falsely stating his net worth in his statement of assets and liabilities added flavour to the nationwide attention being given to the vacancy. Why, even the enrollment in law schools has surged. In the next few years, there will be an oversupply of lawyers but the judicial and bar council will not have a hard time in recommending the next chief justice.
Being a chief justice has not been so glamorous except among lawyers who consider it as a coveted position in the legal profession. More so, it commands a boring and monotonous existence. To maintain the decency and integrity of the office, the chief justice should lead a life of seclusion and rigidity. He cannot mingle with lawyers; he cannot speak his mind in public; he cannot huddle with politicians; he cannot be alone with women; and he cannot fuddle before the crowd. To be deemed independent with the cold neutrality of an impartial judge, he should adapt the life of a hermit away from the trappings of the outside world in a fuddy-duddy way.
A chief justice lives and works incognito except if he presides in matters heard en banc and when he graces the affairs of the bar association.
But in any democracy, being chief justice is not a nondescript position relegated only to determining matters on issues of fact and law. Neither is it a ceremonial office. It is more than that.
The chief justice succeeds to the position of president whenever the sitting president becomes unable or incapable of discharging his duties and whenever the senate president and speaker of congress fails to assume as president due to constitutional reasons.
He may be deemed a president in waiting although the wait may be too long and not soon enough when his mandatory retirement age of 70 forces him to exit the august hall of his lonely chambers.
Whoever becomes the next chief justice, he is expected to come clean and lead the Supreme Court without any skeleton in his closet. The Corona affair is a strong reminder of the public’s clamor for a sanitized and independent judiciary and a bit of déjà vu of the Corona fiasco is a no-no to the Filipinos who have sunk enough to depths and bowels of poverty.
The chief justice should be good enough. The only problem is that a good man like a hard case makes a bad justice – a chief justice at that.
All things being equal, however, the office of the chief justice is a reassurance that the judiciary is the last bulwark of democracy.