Brouhaha over Gloria

The arrest of Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, former president of the Republic of the Philippines, is a case of a blatant display of intimidation by at least one instrumentality of the State – the executive branch of the government. A reading of the incidents leading to the arrest points to the fact that the Department of Justice was bent on preventing Arroyo from leaving the country. The department ignored the temporary restraining order (TRO) issued by the Supreme Court, which allowed the former president to seek medical attention abroad. To buttress its position, the department partnered with the Commission on Elections in determining the culpability of Arroyo to the charge of electoral sabotage, a non-bailable offense that carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. Although there is no clear evidence to pin the department and the commission for collusion, the bottomline is that the commission filed the charge of electoral sabotage on the same day that the Supreme Court was to decide on the right to travel of Mrs. Arroyo. Before the day ended, the court issued the warrant of arrest for the embattled Arroyo.

A fundamental question that demands to be answered is whether the executive branch is justified in ignoring the issuance of the Supreme Court. The standard response to this question is in the negative. The Supreme Court must be obeyed. However, since the court neither declared how it interprets a law nor decided over a competing legal claim, the court may not be followed. Temporary restraining orders issued by courts are not absolute. They are at the very least temporary and at the very most a mere suspension of judgment. Justices of the courts are not paid to stop the wheels of justice from spinning, which is what TROs are all about. Justices are paid to hear the parties in conflict and to decide on the cases brought before their attention. TROs are unconstitutional.

The Pasay Regional Trial court is perhaps within the bounds of its power to issue the warrant of arrest against Mrs. Arroyo. However, it could not have acted if the Commission on Elections did not file the case.

The hospital arrest of Mrs. Arroyo is a testament of how government could abuse its authority. Mrs. Arroyo should be jailed, just like any other persons issued with a warrant of arrest. By putting her instead on hospital arrest, the government is being selective, in addition to being coercive, and abusive.