In 2015, during the Asia CEO Forum, then senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr. already gave the Filipino nation an idea of what his administration would be like.
He emphasized that business should take the lead in nation-building, adding that there is need to create an environment of more opportunities for investors, an environment in which innovation, competition and customer choice, value-added, drives our growth, and an environment in which businesses and consumers alike can be confident in fair, consistent, and uncompromised regulation.
Marcos said the country’s next leader should surround himself or herself with the best of the best in the Cabinet. Calling it meritocracy, he explained that this system must govern all appointments, not only in high-level appointments, but throughout the entire bureaucracy.
And then he spoke of the need for a strong and independent judiciary.
He said that a strong and independent judiciary is a vital necessity, a partner in all our efforts to provide greater opportunities for our people, to maintain our peace and security, encourage discipline, and maintain a productive level playing field for every business and every entrepreneur.
The then senator said that he wants a judiciary that is free from the whiff of corruption and totally above reproach, because its people are employed and rewarded in ways that recognize their competence and good performance, and provide them with respectable livelihood for the important work they do on behalf of our nation.
The independence of the judiciary is enshrined in our Constitution.
Meanwhile, as part of the principle of checks and balances between and among the three independent branches of government namely the executive, judicial and legislative branches, the Constitution vests judicial power in the Supreme Court and in such lower courts as may be established by law, including the Court of Appeals.
According to the Constitution, judicial power “includes the duty of the courts of justice… 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.”
When the courts thumb down an action of the government on the ground that there was grave abuse of discretion, the courts are not asserting their supremacy but are instead asserting the supremacy of the Constitution which the courts are empowered to interpret and enforce.
In one case, the Supreme Court emphasized that the Bill of Rights exists as the most stalwart bulwark against government abuses and that when government action infringes upon the rights protected by the Bill of Rights, the presumption of regularity should not apply. This includes the denial of the right to due process.
SMC Global Power Holdings Corp. (SMCGP) availed of such constitutional remedies when they filed a petition for certiorari with a prayer for TRO and permanent injunction before the Court of Appeals against a ruling of the Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC) which denied its rate hike plea on two of its power supply agreements (PSAs) with Meralco.
SMCGP and Meralco jointly filed with the ERC for a power rate hike in their PSAs after incurring a P15-billion loss amid high global coal prices and natural gas supply restrictions.
President Marcos had stated that he hopes the CA would include in their deliberations the effect such ruling would have on power prices for ordinary Filipinos.
The President back then promised an environment in which businesses and consumers alike can be confident in fair, consistent, and uncompromised regulation.
We still believe the President in the end will stick to his convictions, unswayed by political pressure. And that is what matters.
For comments, e-mail at mareyes@philstarmedia.com