JUSTICE’s Tipped Scale
February 16th, 2006 at 6:53 pm (General, National Politics)
The symbol for justice is that of a blind woman holding a scale. The woman is blind because it does not judge based on external factors and it cannot be influenced by anybody. It judges on the facts of the case and nothing else.
Unfortunately, the Justice System in the Philippines is seemingly not blind. The accused for the biggest cases in the country remain to be unpunished.
The Marcoses and their cronies who grossly plundered the country’s wealth, tortured and killed thousands of human rights victims. Imelda Marcos continues to plead innocence and even claim to be a victim of a conspiracy.
Former President Joseph Estrada might be granted “temporary freedom” for the sake of “reconciliation.” No, it doesn’t seem to matter that he is being tried for plunder and betrayal of public trust.
Governor Chavit Singson, self-confessed jueteng lord is also is free as a bird.
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who has apologized for a “lapse of judgment” which has possibly resulted in gross cheating in the last presidential elections is still president and hasn’t been formally tried for her misdeeds.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, in the Philippines, it’s ok to be a criminal as long as you do it in great magnitude and possess great power in order to avoid paying for your crime.
Undeniably, our justice system and our sense of justice are systematically and culturally flawed.
Related Posts:- On Pardoning the Magdalo Mutineers
- I Will Not Accept An Absolute Pardon
- In the News 09/07/05
- Giving Outsourcing in the Philippines a Bad Name
- Charter Change
JDEspaldon said,
June 13, 2006 at 10:21 pm
The height of criminal prosecution in our country is when the alleged wrongdoer in our country is arrested and shown on television behind the arresting officers and public officials obsessed with publicity. The trial that followed, unless the case turns out to be sensational, is more often than not forgotten and the public would be clueless as to what evidence has been presented or omitted to be presented, or how trial proceeded, in court. Then after several years and after almost everyone – except the victim, the accused and their relatives — has forgotten about the crime, we hear reports that a decision has been reached and the accused is convicted or acquitted. By that time we could not care less of what happened to the accused and what will happen to him after the verdict. The much delay in the prosecution of crimes in our country contributes quite deeply to the lack of respect of the people for the Rule of Law and the system of justice in our country.
That is why, I believe that we have to overhaul the judicial system and introduce now a jury trial. A jury trial is not a sure solution for judicial delay but it will compel people to see their responsibility in dispensation of justice and understand how justice is dispensed in our country. The people must serve in the jury and share in the responsibility in acquitting and convicting an accused.
Of course, a jury trial is not a foolproof remedy as to what ails our judicial system. There is always the attendant danger of false appreciation of facts when they are presented to people not versed in law and the Rules on Evidence. Litigants and lawyers may also tamper jury. There is also a problem of costs. There is also problem of delay in sequestering jury members not to mention quite a number of current lawyers who are expert pettifoggers. These problems, however, can be solved. We can only take inspiration from western countries, which adopted jury trial even when they were not yet rich and affluent, and they never abandon the system even during the times of economic depression.
Jury system, however, will enhance the dignity of our courts. People will see that criminal prosecution does not start and end in arrest of accused but has its sublime end in rendition of justice by a court of law after the jury of peers of accused has determined his criminal liability. Lawyers will be compelled to be industrious and conscientious of their role in the dispensation of justice. Lawyers may also deliver their case summation verbally, preferably in our own native language, and hopefully produce orations on points of law worthy of respect and appreciation by the public. Perhaps, such oral argument will even encourage us to love our own native language. For the Bill of Rights embodied in our Constitution are of equal value and majesty even if argued in Filipino. Judges, too, will be completely relieved of the pressure and danger appurtenant to determination of the facts of the case and assessing the guilt of accused. They will only determine, after verdict by jury, the applicable sentence on the accused. Allegations of corruptions against judges may also be minimized, as they no longer have any say as to the liability of accused.
Jury will commit mistakes for only God is the infallible jury. But there is a Latin maxim which we have to take heart as it is basis of the judicial system of America, a country from which we copied unabashedly our jurisprudence and most of the provisions of our Constitution: Ad Quaestiones Facti Non Respondent Judices; Ad Quaestiones Legis Non Respondent Juratores. The judges do not answer questions of facts; the jurors do not answer questions of law.
Mrs.C. Dijkhuyzen said,
February 18, 2007 at 2:45 pm
Where is the pursuit of justice with all these looters of our country?Will imelda be acquitted again and again?WAKE UP JUSTICES OF THE PHILIPPINES.