EDITORIAL - The judiciary and corruption

With public outrage unabated over government corruption, the Supreme Court has weighed in on the issue, indicating readiness to once again make public the statements of assets, liabilities and net worth or SALN of SC justices.

It still remains to be seen whether the SC will lift its strict restrictions on the release of SALNs, which inspired the rest of the government and even the previous ombudsman to treat the asset declarations as top-secret documents.

This year the SC caused dismay in certain quarters when it ruled – with uncharacteristic haste, and without allowing oral arguments – that the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte was unconstitutional. Critics bewailed that the ruling was self-serving for the SC, effectively making it nearly impossible for the House of Representatives to impeach anyone including SC justices.

This ruling is under appeal, but this time, adjudication seems to have reverted to the usual snail’s pace. Meanwhile, the author or ponente of the original ruling, Associate Justice Marvic Leonen – who previously faced the threat of impeachment over his SALN and case backlog – has called on the judiciary to fight corruption.

Leonen can put his money where his mouth is by leading in the release of his SALN, to be followed by his colleagues.

The SC can also go beyond anti-corruption rhetoric by getting tough on the implementation of its rules for speedy trial. Those rules are in keeping with laws and the Constitution, which are underpinned by the principle that justice delayed is justice denied.

Investment groups and even the US State Department have cited the judiciary as one of the most corrupt in the Philippine government. A compromised judiciary is seen as one of the reasons why corruption has grown to such a gargantuan scale in public works alone.

Judiciary members are beyond the reach of the Office of the Ombudsman, but they are not immune from criminal prosecution. They can also be pursued for tax evasion and money laundering.

Scrutiny of SALNs could have at least moderated the insatiable greed that underpins corruption. Yet it was the SC itself that led the way in making the SALN top-secret. A retired SC justice, Samuel Martires, tried to institutionalize the secrecy when he was named ombudsman.

The public now hopes that the SC’s avowed openness to making its members’ SALNs public is not mere rhetoric. The SC must also ensure that court orders are actually executed within a reasonable period from issuance.

Beyond words, the best way for the judiciary to fight corruption is by delivering justice honestly, swiftly and efficiently.