"x x x.
Now lets look at the Supreme Court. The third branch of government is unique. It is composed of 15 high magistrates with absolutely no direct mandate from the people, unlike our legislators and the President. Unlike with all other government officials, it is generally prohibited to talk to the Justices of the Supreme Court. And yet they are so privileged. They earn among the highest salaries in government and enjoy many privileges as public servants. They will receive probably the best retirement-pension arrangement that government can provide. They wield great power because their decisions can affect private individuals and the whole nation. They can put a man to jail for life. Even if their decision is wrong, they will generally not be held accountable but the incarcerated innocent person will suffer the ignominy, hardship, and desolation of a prison cell and, more often than not, without anymore recourse. And these justices can only be ousted through an impeachment trial which is the hardest procedure for removing a public servant. It is therefore highly justified that the citizenry have the highest expectations as to their performance. There is no room for error on their part because their decision can mean life or death, freedom or its deprivation, emancipation or continued bondage, justice or injustice.
Insofar as the Constitution is concerned, the Supreme Court's role is key. The justices interpret the Constitution and its provisions directly affecting the manner of their implementation.
But how has the Supreme Court performed lately? A tendency to flip-flop, which was an issue in the impeachment trial of ousted Chief Justice Corona, is still perceived as existing. The Court's ruling on partylists is a good example: from a former interpretation imbued with a social cause, which reserved the system only in favor of the marginalized or underprivileged sectors of society, the Supreme Court has changed the very essence of the entire partylist system, now making it open to all, including billionaires, thereby removing the preference for the underrepresented.
Regardless of the arguments of the justices, there is a perception that interpretations change depending on who sit as justices.
Justice Hugo Black of the United States Supreme Court said: "(The) Constitution was not written in the sands to be washed away by each wave of new judges blown in by each successive political wind." And yet the decision in the mayoralty race in a town in Cavite is also illustrative: originally the Supreme Court decided for the defeated mayor to assume the position. Then it was changed to the "other" mayor. If this pattern continues, justice may be elusive for both contending parties.
The ouster of Chief Justice Renato Corona was dramatic, but the appointment of a new Chief Justice was perhaps traumatic to some in the judiciary. Immediately after the assumption of Chief Justice Sereno, the gestures of the other justices or some of them were negative. There was no attendance in the flag ceremony generating a public perception of bickerings, professional jealousy, and personal animosity within the institution. There were even story-leaks of non-attendance in meetings and even shouting matches in en banc sessions. If the Supreme Court is supposed to stand for all the good things in the Constitution, the said actuations of the Justices do not reflect this.
These observations cannot be shoved aside. Public perceptions, though at times presumptuous, are not simply generated out of nothing. People make judgments from what they see and read. If fully expressed publicly, their accumulation creates public opinion. Government may or may not heed public opinion depending on its consistency with public interest, but public opinion must nevertheless always be given a measure of serious scrutiny. As George Bancroft, a famous American historian, said "the best government rests on the people, and not on the few, on persons and not on property, on the free development of public opinion and not on authority."
The wheels of democracy effectively turn only to the extent that public opinion is addressed correctly and effectively by the government.
x x x."
