Echoes From
BY JOHNNY DAYANG
Rule of Law
We live in a civilized society under a Rule of Law regime and not the Law of the Jungle which permits anarchy and allows only the fittests to survive.
The rule of law idea proceeds from the Social Contract concept postulated by the great Greek philosophers under which man is deemed to have surrendered to society part of his unbridled ego and urges in exchange for the recognition by everyone of his freedom to pursue his civilized and legitimate aspirations under a uniform and equitable regime of rights and justice.
The regime seeks to subject every individual to a universal and uniform system of rules and regulations that provides both rewards and sanctions for those who either follow or violate the rules. To implement the system an institutionalized final arbiter of the laws, the Supreme Court – has been installed, among other corollary social institutions.
The Supreme Court has recently made landmark decisions involving rights under the real of Rule of law. Two of these landmark rulings promulgated by the High Court involve the right of a sitting President of the Republic to seek a lower office at the terminal end of her presidential tenure, and the right of appointed officials to hang on and remain in their offices even after they have filed their candidacy for elective offices.
The High Court has ruled that there is no legal impediment to the decision of incumbent President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to run for Congressman of Pampanga. The decision resolved in favor of the Chief Executive an issue raised by certain parties over the legitimacy of her political moves in relation to existing laws.
The High Tribunal has likewise reversed an earlier en banc decision by its collegial body and ruled that appointed government officials who seek elective posts are deemed to have resigned ipso facto (after the fact or as a result of) from their offices upon filing their certificate of candidacy for the positions they aspire for.
The law provides well defined procedures and processes for affected parties to clarify shady areas of such decisions but at the end of the day, it will be to the interest of the general public welfare if we all respect the decisions of the High Tribunal.
BY JOHNNY DAYANG
Rule of Law
We live in a civilized society under a Rule of Law regime and not the Law of the Jungle which permits anarchy and allows only the fittests to survive.
The rule of law idea proceeds from the Social Contract concept postulated by the great Greek philosophers under which man is deemed to have surrendered to society part of his unbridled ego and urges in exchange for the recognition by everyone of his freedom to pursue his civilized and legitimate aspirations under a uniform and equitable regime of rights and justice.
The regime seeks to subject every individual to a universal and uniform system of rules and regulations that provides both rewards and sanctions for those who either follow or violate the rules. To implement the system an institutionalized final arbiter of the laws, the Supreme Court – has been installed, among other corollary social institutions.
The Supreme Court has recently made landmark decisions involving rights under the real of Rule of law. Two of these landmark rulings promulgated by the High Court involve the right of a sitting President of the Republic to seek a lower office at the terminal end of her presidential tenure, and the right of appointed officials to hang on and remain in their offices even after they have filed their candidacy for elective offices.
The High Court has ruled that there is no legal impediment to the decision of incumbent President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to run for Congressman of Pampanga. The decision resolved in favor of the Chief Executive an issue raised by certain parties over the legitimacy of her political moves in relation to existing laws.
The High Tribunal has likewise reversed an earlier en banc decision by its collegial body and ruled that appointed government officials who seek elective posts are deemed to have resigned ipso facto (after the fact or as a result of) from their offices upon filing their certificate of candidacy for the positions they aspire for.
The law provides well defined procedures and processes for affected parties to clarify shady areas of such decisions but at the end of the day, it will be to the interest of the general public welfare if we all respect the decisions of the High Tribunal.
No comments:
Post a Comment