Contempt of court
Yesterday’s impeachment trial was expected to coast along, albeit with some fireworks from Senator-Judge Miriam Santiago who had been quite hard on the prosecution panel since Day One.
The proceedings would have been humdrum after the prosecution announced that they would drop the eight other articles of impeachment and stick with the three, signifying their confidence in the strength of their complaint.
But trust Santiago to have a word or two, if not the last word, on the impeachment trial. No sooner had the prosecution waffled over the scheduled date of their offer of evidence that the senator berated them anew for their seeming inconsistency in their presentation and handling of their case.
Apparently Santiago’s verbal assaults proved too much for one of the prosecution lawyers, Vitaliano Aguirre, who covered his ears due to what he described as the senator’s “shrill voice.”
It would have gone unnoticed during the trial to be picked up later in news coverages for its humor or entertainment value. But Sen. Jinggoy Estrada didn’t find it funny and pointed it out, causing Santiago to erupt and cite Aguirre for contempt.
That incident, however entertaining a sidelight it may be, would have been consigned to lesser significance in most news outlets were it not for the fact that it occurred just as the Supreme Court announced the list of passers in last year’s bar examinations.
The blessed law students who will join their elders of the bar a few weeks from now will do well to remember this incident as they get to practice their profession right after their oath-taking.
However grating and contemptuous Santiago may be in the public’s eyes, the Senate impeachment court had a point when it cited Aguirre for contempt if only to emphasize to everyone that utmost respect should be observed and accorded to a court of law and the officers assigned to it.
At the same time, court procedures and rules of court aside, this is an impeachment trial where the bottomline and currency is and always will be public opinion. As such respect is earned not just from the court officers but from the viewing and reading public, a lot of whom don’t take kindly to the senator’s posturing and lecturing.
Since she’s headed to an international court, Santiago could very well insult everyone short of her fellow senator-judges and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile to her heart’s content.
She may or may not run for public office, where she may only invite contempt from voters leery of her haughty behavior and her tendency to call anyone she criticizes in court as gago (fool).
Rep. Rodolfo Fariñas, despite his temper, was sensible enough to ask the court to remove Santiago’s insult to them from the record that the senator was agreeable to.
He may be a cautionary tale for aspiring and newly-inducted lawyers on how NOT to deal with an adversarial judge, but Vitaliano Aguirre had only reflected well the sentiments of a growing number of critics of Santiago, who have had enough of legalistic delays and maneuverings and are only too concerned about the search for the truth on the charges against Chief Justice Renato Corona.
