Here’s an interesting article on the “frenemy” (friend/rival) relationship between Philippine Supreme Court justices Carpio and Corona, both nominated for the Chief Justice position. Vitug covers this in more depth in her book Shadow of Doubt (which I promise I will review soon).
A good reason for judges to sleep late: avoid assassination attempts
Unfortunately, assassination attempts are a very real part of life for Philippine judges. During my work at the Asia Foundation, I heard one judge explain how he had to hire private bodyguards. Here’s a miraculous story from the Philippine Inquirer this morning:
Manila [Regional Trial Court] Branch 26 Judge Silvino Pampilo Jr.’s vehicle, a Honda CRV with plate number 16NCR26, exploded this morning.
Pampilo said it is fortunate that he was a little late in making his way to work this morning.
He usually leaves his house at 6 a.m. due to the distance between his house and the Manila courts.
Judge Pampilo is currently handling a few controversial cases, including the audit of three big oil companies and the case of Silver Flores, who has been accused of killing an activist upon orders of the military. Over 16 judges have been killed since 1999, and the Supreme Court confirmed threats against another 20-30. This is a real problem, but alas it’s unlikely we’ll see any major efforts to improve judges’ security details.
Comments Off on A good reason for judges to sleep late: avoid assassination attempts
Filed under Philippines
Buyer’s remorse
Former Chief Justice Hilario Davide, just announced his endorsement for Aquino for president. According to the Philippine Inquirer, he doesn’t regret the fact that he swore Arroyo in (in constitutionally questionable circumstances), but does suggest she hasn’t been an ideal president, to say the least. This could be something along the lines of Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama back in 2008 – a high-profile figure who helped the former president disassociates himself and endorses the young rising star.
This raises an interesting question of what prompted Davide to swear Arroyo in for a full term as president back in 2001. Did Davide change his mind over time? Possibly. However, it’s not clear Davide was an Arroyo loyalist even in the early days. He ruled against her administration several times. According to the book Shadow of Doubt, Davide probably only meant to swear her in as acting president, but, he alleges, he got caught up in the moment of EDSA II. The large crowds both inspired and intimidated him. Alas, if he had a bit more nerve, the past 10 years might have been radically different.
Comments Off on Buyer’s remorse
Filed under Philippines, Supreme Court
Citizen’s law enforcement on the High Seas
For whatever reason, I find it fascinating to study the different ways courts handle legal standing for public interest cases. Many countries reduce the procedural requirements for citizens bringing lawsuits in public interest or citizen’s suits. I’m currently working on two papers on environmental citizen’s suits (Pakistan and the E.U.). However, I did think it worth raising one interesting question.
As some of you might be aware, the conservation group Sea Shepherd has made it its business to harass Japanese whalers in the Antarctic Sea. They allege that Japan’s whaling ships are violating both the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling and Australian law. I think they have some good law on their side, although then again I’m biased – I had up close encounters with Humpback Whales in Antarctica. For more background, check out the book Harpoon.
Recently, the BBC reported that the Sea Shepherd’s efforts have reduced Japan’s whale harvest by over half. This is certainly a victory for the whales. However, it also raises interesting legal questions. Most governments allow citizens to enforce the law as “deputy sheriffs,” but within the confines of courts and traditional litigation. In the whaling case, activists did seek and obtain a court judgment against the whalers, but to no avail. As such, when is it appropriate for citizens to use other means to enforce the law when governments can’t or won’t? Where is the boundary between neighborhood watch programs and vigilanteism?
I certainly sympathize with Sea Shepherd’s dilemma and appreciate that some environmentalists are really making sacrifices to protect wildlife (as opposed to just writing yet more policy reports). With the rise of the internet and individual agency, it is now easier and cheaper for citizens to organize and punish violations of law. I think we’ll be seeing more of this type of “citizen’s enforcement,” at least where courts and the rule of law remain weak (like some countries in Southeast Asia).
Comments Off on Citizen’s law enforcement on the High Seas
Filed under Antarctica, Whales, Whaling
Burma’s election law and the least successful lawsuit in history
According to Irrawaddy, a couple of days ago, several National League for Democracy officials, including Nyan Win, Tin Oo and Aung Shwe, filed a lawsuit against Senior General Than Shwe in the Burmese Supreme Court. They complained that the SPDC had promulgated an “unjust and unfair” election law. The suit probably would have been dismissed had the court heard it. However, the Supreme Court simply handed the litigation documents back, saying it had no jurisdiction to handle the case.
First of all, “unjust and unfair” seems like an odd and unlikely basis for any lawsuit in Burma. Or elsewhere frankly. Unless the election law violates a superior law, there doesn’t seem to be any legal basis for dismissing the law. The “unjust and unfair” complaint seems more like a request for equity (or “justice” more broadly) than a request for a legal remedy.
Another issue is the election law itself. I haven’t commented on this, but I think a lot of the criticism is misguided. The main criticism of the election law is that it prohibits anybody with a criminal conviction (e.g., imprisoned) from running in the elections. This means that Suu Kyi, who is currently under house arrest, would be banned from running. I would obviously love for Suu Kyi and NLD to be able to contest the elections. However, at least as a legal requirement, this doesn’t seem so bizarre at all. Many countries prohibit felons from running or even voting in elections. In the U.S., prisoners and ex-cons lose other constitutional rights. In some sense, this makes sense – in most countries, somebody in prison probably committed a crime that makes then unqualified for public office.
As such, it seems to me the real issue in Burma isn’t the election law, but rather the broad scope of “crimes” under Burmese law. The State Protection Law is but one example of legislation (often from the colonial era) that is so broadly drafted as to allow the SPDC to criminalize almost anything. This is what allowed the SPDC to “criminalize” Suu Kyi’s “violation” of her house arrest last year.
Of course, this problem goes beyond the election law. Many of the Fundamental Rights provisions in Burma’s 2008 Constitution allow the government to limit rights based upon “law.” The Constitutional Tribunal can enforce the constitution, but will probably defer to the governemnt on politically sensitive issues (for more, here’s an article I wrote for Irrawaddy). As long as Burma keeps its overly broad laws and expansive definitions of criminal activity on the books, there seems little room for civil and political rights under the new constitution.
Comments Off on Burma’s election law and the least successful lawsuit in history
Filed under Burma
Dominic J. Nardi, Jr. 
You must be logged in to post a comment.