Supreme – Even in Error

A time-honored principle of our system of constitutional government is that the Supreme Court is supreme in so far as it performs its mandated duties under the Constitution. And a most important provision enshrined in our present Constitution-learning from the lesson of a puppet Supreme Court during the Marcos Dictatorship-is the express power of judicial review.

The provision reads: "Judicial power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable, and to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the Government." (Art. VIII, sec. 1, para. 2)

When the Supreme Court acts in judicial review of "any branch or instrumentality of the Government" that includes the President or Executive Department, it does not actually exercise superiority over the said agency as to imperil the separation of powers and equality of the three great branches of government. Rather, the Court simply upholds the supremacy of law, the Constitution itself, no less.

Thus, Supreme Court Administrator Midas Marquez was quick to justify the issuance of a temporary restraining or status quo ante order against PNoy's executive order reversing GMA's midnight appointments. In a "Statement on Bai Omera D. Dianalan-Lucman vs. Exec. Secretary Ochoa Jr., G.R. No. 193519", Mr. Marquez explained:

"Judicial review, which includes the power to issue temporary restraining orders and status quo ante orders, is NOT a privilege, but a DUTY imposed by the Constitution on the Court. It cannot shirk this duty.

"The status quo ante order was issued after a judicious review of the circumstances in the Lucman petition. The fact that it covers only the Lucman petition shows that it is a class of its own and it cannot be invoked as a blanket remedy for all the so-called midnight appointees.

"Rest assured that we have a Supreme Court which is not governed by passing emotions or daily polls, but by the Rule of Law, serving not the special interest of the few, but the best interest of all, committed not to self-preservation, but to the preservation of those great constitutional principles bequeathed by history."

It's up to Joel Cadiz now, our Solicitor General, to defend PNoy's EO. And whatever the final decision in that case would be, Joel might want to remind PNoy that even if such decision would be wrong from his perspective as President, still the Supreme Court would have the final say.

It will do no good for the country if PNoy himself would undermine the Supreme Court's supremacy in the exercise of judicial review.

True, PNoy enjoys unprecedented popularity, but that mandate certainly includes ensuring the Rule of Law where the law in the final analysis is what the Supreme Court says it is.

Yes, Mr. President, the Supreme Court is supreme - even in error.