Radio Veritas
Interview with Fr. Romillo Aquino – Dean, San Beda College

March 27, 2008

Q: HOW DO YOU LOOK AT THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT?

A: WELL MELO, I THINK THAT THESE SERVE THE PURPOSES OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW VERY WELL IN THE SENSE THAT AT LEAST NOW WE KNOW THE EXTENT OF THE POWERS OF CONGRESSIONAL INQUIRY THIS BEING THE POWER OF THE PRESIDENT’S TO INVOKE THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. I THINK IT IS A WELL REASONED AND WELL ARGUED DECISION… YES BUT IT THEY HAVE BEEN SIMILARLY CLOSE DECISION IN THE PAST IN FACT IN IPRA CASE WHICH WAS CRUZ VERSUS DENR YOU HAVE A  COURT THAT WAS EVENLY SPLIT MABUTI DITO 9-6 PA DOON IT WAS EXACTLY 7-7.

Q: DIDN’T YOU FIND IT STRANGE THAT CHIEF JUSTICE HAD A DESCENDING OPINION?

A: NO, THAT HAPPENS VERY OFTEN THE CHIEF JUSTICE SOMETIMES DESCENDS FROM THE REST OF THE COURT AND FROM THE REST OF HIS DIVISION AND I’M NOT SURPRISED AT ALL. BUT I MUST ALSO SAY THAT THE CHIEF JUSTICES DESCENDING OPINION WAS AS USUAL AND PERSUASIVELY ARGUED.

Q: THERE WAS AN ARTICLE IN A NEWSPAPER WHICH DESCRIBES THE DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT AS “NOT A DECISION BUT AN EVASION”.

A: THAT’S A CRITICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF THOSE WHO ARE NOT CONTENT OF THE JUDGEMENT AND WHO ARE NOT CIVIC SPIRITED ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO KNOW THAT A SUPREME COURT JUDGEMENT UNTIL IT IS SET ASIDE LEAST DOWN DOCTRINE.

Q: WHAT ARE THE OTHER CHANCES OF GETTING THE DECISION OVERTURNED?

A: IN FACT YESTERDAY I THINK, THEY PREPARING A MOTION FOR RECONCIDERATION. THERE IS ALWAYS A CHANCE THAT MARGIN 9-6, I DON’T SEE A VERY CLEAR PROSPECT OF THE COURT REVERSING ITSELF A MOTION FOR RECONCILIATION ALTHOUGH THE POSSIBILITY ALWAYS EXIST AND I WOULD STILL SUPPORT THE SUPREME COURT IF IT WILL REVERSE ITSELF ON THIS MATTER. WHAT IS IMPORTANT IS THAT WE HAVE CLEAR CONSTITUTIONAL GUIDELINES.

Q: THE DECISION WILL NOT PREVENT SEC. NERI FROM PRESENTING HIMSELF TO THE SENATE, SHOULD HE DECIDES SO RIGHT?

A: YES AS LONG AS THE QUESTION THEY ASKED IS NOT COVERED BY THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE. I JUST WANT TO MENTION THIS, BUT THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IS NOT ENJOYED BY THE PRESIDENT FOR HER SAKE OR FOR THE SAKE OF THE OFFICE THAT SHE OCCUPIED. AND SO EVEN IF NERI MIGHT NOT LIKE TO ANSWER IF THE PRESIDENT INVOKE THE EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE IN HIS BEHALF SHE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO THAT.

Q: HOW CAN A SECURITY AND STATE OR DIPLOMATIC RELATIONS BE AT STAKE IF IT IS IN RELATION WITH PUBLICLY LISTED CORPORATION LIKE ZTE?

A: IN THE FIRST PLACE DON’T FORGET THAT ZTE CORPORATION WAS THE CORPORATION SELECTED BY THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA IN SO FAR AS ITS LOAN, SOFT LOAN TO THE PHILIPPINES WAS CONFIRMED SO THERE ARE FOREIGN RELATION INVOLVES HERE IN SO FAR AS THE MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR THE ZTE THING WAS PART OF THE LOAN EXTENDED BY THE PEOPLES REPUBLIC OF CHINA AND IT WAS PROC THAT SELECTED ZTE  WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE BECAUSE ZTE IS ONE OF ITS LEADING CORPORATION SECONDLY, EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE ALSO EXTENDS TO THE CONVERSATION BETWEEN THE PREIDENT AND HER OFFICIAL IN MAKING OR DECIDING POLICY EVEN AS THEY  RELATE TO FOREIGN RELATION AT DAPAT MALIWANAG SA MGA TAO NA ANG EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE KASE AY NANDIYAN AND UNHUMPERED  YUNG PAKIKIPAG-USAP NG PRESIDENTE SA KANYANG MGA ADVISERS AT FOREIGN GOVERNMENT, OTHERWISE IF YOU REQUIRE DISCLOSURE AND ALLOW DISPOSURE AT EVERY TURN ANG COMMUNICATION AND EXCHANGE OF VIEWS WOULD BE HINDERED VERY DRASTICALLY.

Q: ANO PO YUNG MESSAGE NIYO SA ATING MGA TAGAPAKINIG?

A: THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPURTUNITY. ONE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, A SENATOR THREATENING THE NATION AND THE SUPREME COURT WITH THE PROSPECT OF A CONSTITUTIONAL CRISIS, LET US NOT BE CHILDISH, LETS BE MATURE AND LETS BE STATESMAN-LIKE, LETS ACT AS STATEMAN. I THINK IF OUR DEMOCRACY IS TO SURVIVE AND TO FLOURISH ONE IMPORTANT THING IS TO STRENGTHENING OF OUR CONSTITUTION IGALANG YUNG MGA INSTITUSYON OF COURSE DAPAT YUNG MEN AND WOMEN WHO ARE IN OUR INSTITUTIONS MUST BEHAVE HONORABLY BUT THAT ALSO MEANS THAT WE MUST FOSTER THE REPUBLIC TRUST AND CONFIDENCE IN OUR INSTITUTION.