[LEGAL NOTES] Upholding the rule of law or the rule of men? (On the SC recall of its FASAP decision)

It has been said that the Supreme Court is the last bulwark of constitutional rights and liberties. But, what happens when the Supreme Court itself transgresses these very rights that it is duty-bound to protect?

  

The Supreme Court is vested with the power to protect the constitutionally guaranteed rights of the citizens and provide a redress of wrongs for violations of such rights.  However, the recent decision of the Supreme Court to recall the final and executory judgment in the case between the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP) and the Philippine Airlines (PAL) has placed the integrity of the High Court in question. 

[LEGAL NOTES] Void or valid?: The legal acrobatics of the Supreme Court decision on Hacienda Luisita

Tweet

Decision or Confusion?

In its decision dated July 5, 2011, the Supreme Court affirmed the resolution of the Presidential Agrarian Reform Council (PARC) revoking the Stock Distribution Plan (SDP) of the Hacienda Luisita Inc. (HLI). At first glance, it may seem that the decision is a victory for the farmers. However, a close reading of the lengthy decision will show that it leaves much to be desired.

[LEGAL NOTES] HB 13, or the so-called Right to Life of the Unborn Child Bill, is not pro-life

Tweet

Contrary to the claims of anti-RH lobbyists, nothing in the RH bill changes the law against abortion. The only bill that by implication would change the anti-abortion provision of the Revised Penal Code is HB 13, the so-called Right to Life of the Unborn Child championed by Rep. Golez and Pampanga Rep. GMA. By lowering the penalty for the crime of abortion, HB 13 is actually encouraging abortion. 

Delineating between abortifacients and contraceptives       

One of the arguments of anti-RH groups is that contraceptives are abortifacients. However, the two terms, often-used in discourses regarding the RH bill, should not be used interchangeably because there exists a huge and glaring difference between words “abortifacients” and “contraceptives”.

[LEGAL NOTES] Reproductive Health Bill: A pro-life bill

Tweet

One of the constant tirades hurled against the Reproductive Health Bill by Anti-RH groups is that the bill is not a pro-life legislation.

This criticism is absolutely baseless as a close scrutiny of the provisions of the RH bill will show that it is actually a pro-life legislation.

Despite the clear import of the RH bill, its critics are determined to obstruct its passage in the House of Representatives. Their arguments range from the allegation that the bill is an anti-life bill and referred to themselves as a pro-life group, as opposed to the proponents of the bill which they labeled as anti-life.

[LEGAL NOTES] HLI must subscribe to the tenets of social justice and distribute the land to the farmers

Tweet

The Stock Distribution Program being implemented by Hacienda Luisita is contrary to the purpose of the agrarian reform law and violates the constitution. 

To meet the ends of social justice, the distribution of the land to the farmers who have tilled it all their lives is in order.

The provision in the law which allows such option should also be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court for being contrary to the noble purpose of agrarian reform.