Word war between Palace and high court continues

MANILA, Philippines—The word war between Malacañang and the Supreme Court spilled into the weekend as one of President Benigno Aquino’s aides said Saturday that the judiciary’s independence did not mean it was exempt from criticism for its actions.

Abigail Valte, deputy presidential spokesperson, was reacting to remarks attributed to the court administrator and Supreme Court spokesperson Midas Marquez that the executive branch should first iron out problems with its own issuances before criticizing the tribunal.

“Independence does not mean you are free from criticism as well, ” Valte said in an interview on the government-run radio station dzRB. “In the executive we take that to heart. Even if it is an independent and co-equal branch of government we still get criticism and we take that in stride.”

“We don’t see that as an attack on the President as well,” she added.

Aquino himself last Wednesday was critical of a recent Supreme Court recall of a supposedly final ruling by one of its divisions that favored a group of Philippine Airlines  employees terminated by the company in 1998.

The Palace had also inserted a provision in the draft budget for 2013 that would have withheld salary allocations for unfilled positions in various government agencies, including constitutional bodies such as the judiciary and the Commission on Elections. The judiciary vehemently opposed the move, saying it was an encroachment on its constitutionally guaranteed fiscal independence.

On Thursday, Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona lashed out at critics of the court in both the Palace and Congress, saying they were undermining the judiciary’s independence through budget cuts and threats of impeachment.

Aquino’s spokesman, Edwin Lacierda, responded to that broadside, saying Corona was sidestepping the controversy spawned by the court’s flip-flopping on the PAL and other cases.

“You know that on point we are not alone in asking what happened,” Valte said in Saturday’s radio interview. “Of course we were asked for reactions and Secretary Lacierda, being a lawyer, was also confused at what happened. Because when you say ‘final decision,’ I have to reiterate, when is a final decision really final?”

“It was really confusing. It was a valid question from the sectors to ask what happened. Independence does not mean you are free from criticism as well,” she added

On a related matter, Valte said the Palace saw nothing wrong with convening the Judicial, Executive and Legislative Advisory and Consultative Council as proposed by some members of the House of Representatives to resolve issues between the three major branches of the government.

“I think there would be nothing wrong, except if it is to be called for the issue of the budget. (That) is a settled issue; there’s no need to go around it and still talk about it.”

Congress has said it will respect the constitutional provision that constitutional agencies’ budgetary allocations would be automatically released to them once approved by Congress.