MANILA, Philippines?Benigno ?Noynoy? Aquino III will no longer take his oath before a barangay (village) captain when he is proclaimed the winner in the presidential election, his spokesperson said Wednesday.

Lawyer Edwin Lacierda said the Aquino camp was now considering a notary public, a judge or a justice of the Court of Appeals to swear in the Liberal Party standard-bearer.

Or, it will probably be an associate justice of the Supreme Court, according to a source who asked not to be named for lack of authority to speak publicly on the matter. But Lacierda said there was still no decision on that.

?If you take your oath before an associate justice, that shows your continued respect for the Supreme Court as an institution and as a coequal branch of government, but not for the decision [of the high court authorizing President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo?s appointment of Renato Corona as Chief Justice],? Lacierda said.

?The issue here is not the person of Justice Corona but the authority of the President to make an appointment during that period when appointments are prohibited by the Constitution,? Lacierda said.

?Definitely, the appointment was within the prohibited period,? he said.

Limited authority

Aquino had earlier said he was considering taking his oath before a barangay captain in his home province of Tarlac in accordance with his stated position that he would not recognize Ms Arroyo?s ?midnight? appointments.

But his camp noted that the Local Government Code (LGC) limits a barangay captain?s authority in swearing in officials.

?That has been ruled out because Section 420 of the [LGC] says that a barangay captain can only administer an oath relative to his function? as chair of the lupong tagapamayapa (peace and order council), Lacierda said.

Lacierda reiterated that Ms Arroyo should not have appointed retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno?s successor.

?The fear then was that the presidential election would be contested and we needed a chief justice at the Supreme Court which will sit as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal (PET),? Lacierda said.

?But those concerns that we would have chaos have been quashed by the overwhelming mandate of Senator Aquino. [Ms Arroyo] would have known this as early as May 12,? he said.

Media blitz

Just three days in office, Corona kept up his media blitz by appearing live in two more shows Wednesday morning to defend his appointment against constitutional questions and to reach out to Aquino.

Corona?s string of TV and radio appearances in a span of two days has disconcerted members of the legal circle such as University of the Philippines law professor Theodore Te.

By Te?s reckoning, it is the first time in memory that a Chief Justice is engaging in sit-down interviews when judicial propriety demands that magistrates shun the limelight to avoid undue influence.

Te pointed out that not even then Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban?who was seen as the most media-accessible magistrate?took Corona?s route of appearing in talk shows and news programs.

This is because the high court is supposed to speak through its written decisions and opinions, ?and not through its spokesperson or even its Chief Justice,? said Te, a human rights lawyer.

?When the Chief Justice talks about his opinion outside of the proceedings in the court, there is the danger of his saying something undue, perhaps in answer to a question that may not be contextualized,? Te said in an interview after Corona appeared in two GMA 7 programs Wednesday.

Possible violation of code

Corona may have violated the Code of Judicial Conduct on Tuesday when, in response to a question over dzMM radio?s ?Dos Por Dos,? he gave his personal opinion that the PET could not be abolished because it was allowed under the Constitution.

Then, realizing that the petition filed by Ms Arroyo?s former election lawyer Romulo Makalintal to abolish the PET had yet to be ruled upon, he backtracked.

This was what Corona said: ?Actually, tingin ko kahit hindi i-abolish ?yan e kasi nasa Saligang Batas ?yang electoral tribunal na ?yan. Ewan ko lang, kasi may kaso ?yan. Mahirap yan.?

Te said that even if Corona eventually withdrew his opinion, ?the danger was there, and it happened.?

?The possibility of influence is enough. The potential to shape a future decision simply by a careless remark like the PET answer, is enough damage,? he said.

The Code of Judicial Conduct prohibits a judge from ?seeking publicity for personal vainglory? and from ?making public comments on any pending or impending case and should require similar restraint on the part of court personnel.?

But the high court is also the only body that can discipline judges and lawyers.

Corona?s slip

The Chief Justice was the guest in GMA 7?s morning show ?Unang Hirit? and dzBB anchor Mike Enriquez?s program Wednesday.

On Tuesday, he appeared in three ABS-CBN programs, and gave an interview in his office at the Supreme Court as well as a remote interview over GMA 7?s evening news program.

Over dzBB, Corona let slip that he knew he stood to gain from the high court?s controversial decision on March 17 authorizing Ms Arroyo to appoint a new Chief Justice during the period of the ban on election appointments (under Section 15 Article VII of the Constitution).

He said he did not take part in the deliberations, which led to the 9-1 ruling to exempt the high court from the prohibition.

Corona said he inhibited himself because it was clear that he and Associate Justice Antonio Carpio would compete for the post of Chief Justice: ?Nag-inhibit ako kasi malinaw na kami ni Justice Carpio ang magtutunggali.?

Carpio is the high court?s most senior member who, by tradition, should have been next in line when Puno retired on May 17.

When interviewed on Tuesday over the ABS-CBN News Channel, Corona, a former chief of staff and spokesperson of Ms Arroyo, denied that he had expected his appointment.

He said the other two justices who were officially nominated were also personally known to Ms Arroyo.

?Atenistas?

Corona, who will preside over the judiciary for the next eight years, is fending off allegations that the tribunal has become an ?Arroyo Court.?

?I?m taking a lot of time to explain my side. We should be reaching out,? he said Wednesday over dzBB.

He called on Aquino not to pursue the constitutional questions against his appointment, even pointing out that they both attended Ateneo de Manila University and were both marksmen who went to the same gunsmith.

?The Supreme Court is not [Aquino?s] enemy. But it?s also hard to say that it is his friend because we are independent. Let?s avoid hurtful words. It?s totally useless and unnecessary to say these things. We can calm down and show the nation that we can be peaceful,? the Chief Justice said.

But Te said Corona and Ms Arroyo could have spared the high court, particularly the office of the Chief Justice, from controversy in the first place.

?Corona could have declined the appointment; Gloria should not have appointed. That would have prevented a controversy that he is now trying to defend himself from,? Te said.

He also said the tribunal?s public information office headed by Court Administrator Midas Marquez should not have allowed Corona to give sit-down interviews.

?He should not have gone on air, and Midas should have restrained him from doing so,? Te said.

Legal but unethical

The group calling itself Former Senior Government Officials (FSGO) said Ms Arroyo?s appointment of Corona in the middle of an electoral process showed her ?lack of decency? and ?utter disregard? for the results of the presidential election.

?So much has been said to justify the appointment of Justice Renato Corona as lawful, but Malacañang?s apologists have completely missed the point. What is legal is not necessarily ethical,? FSGO said in a statement.

It noted that Ms Arroyo had insisted on making the appointment despite calls for her not to do so. Thus, it said, the appointment had led to more ?divisiveness,? showed lack of respect for the incoming President, and eroded the Supreme Court?s credibility.

The appointment has ?increased suspicion that Arroyo?s action is meant to shield her from being made accountable for the excesses of her administration,? it said, adding:

?In many instances, amidst howls of protest, we have seen the Arroyo administration carry on without regard for the will of the people. Legality was the oft-repeated excuse. But we ask: What about ethical behavior? What about good governance? What about the interests of the country??

A law itself

At a briefing, Ms Arroyo?s chief legal counsel Raoul Victorino said critics should ?write finis? to the issue because Corona had been sworn in as Chief Justice.

Victorino also said Aquino could not issue an executive order nullifying Corona?s appointment without violating the tribunal?s March 17 ruling.

?A Supreme Court decision cannot be overturned [or] reversed by an executive order. The decision of the Supreme Court is a law itself; it?s part of the law of the land,? he said in reaction to reports that Aquino?s camp was considering voiding the appointment through an executive order.

Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile said Aquino and Corona should resolve the conflict and ?control the rhetoric? so as not to ?break the peace.?

?For the sake of the country, they should iron out differences in points of view,? he said.

Enrile also said Corona was correct in going to the media ?to defend himself before the public, because the highest court in this country is the sovereign people.? With reports from TJ Burgonio and Christine O. Avendaño