UP College of Law associate dean Paolo Tamase. Photo courtesy of UP College of Law.
Amidst the leadership row that has pitted senators against each other, a University of the Philippines law expert has opined that the Supreme Court should not interfere in the Senate fiasco just yet in order to allow the distinguished members of the Senate to resolve their leadership issue by themselves.
According to UP College of Law associate dean Paolo Tamase, the SC should only get itself entangled “when there is a ripe dispute” because for the High Tribunal to enter the fray prematurely could result with the judiciary becoming tainted by the politics of the legislative and executive branches of the government.
“It’s tempting to go immediately through the judicial route, since the Supreme Court can definitively interpret the constitutional provisions and rules involved,” the constitutional law expert noted.
“But in past disputes like this, the Court has been careful to function as a safety valve only when all options have been exhausted, since premature intervention will risk being seen by the public as partisan—regardless of what lawyers or even the Court insists—and thus its legitimacy as a politically neutral body,” he added to explain.
For Tamase, despite a wrestle for the Senate presidency, there exists a “functional majority” in the chamber, with Senate President pro tempore Sherwin ‘Win’ Gatchalian, serving as acting Senate president, with a majority 12 members. On the other hand, the new minority bloc led by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano has 10 members.
Reacting to the controversy, the UP dean cited that “there doesn’t seem to be a grave urgency yet for the Court to intervene, unless critical developments emerge in the next few days.” Amidst the leadership row that has pitted senators against each other, a University of the Philippines law expert has opined that the Supreme Court should not interfere in the Senate fiasco just yet in order to allow the distinguished members of the Senate to resolve their leadership issue by themselves.
According to UP College of Law associate dean Paolo Tamase, the SC should only get itself entangled “when there is a ripe dispute” because for the High Tribunal to enter the fray prematurely could result with the judiciary becoming tainted by the politics of the legislative and executive branches of the government.
“It’s tempting to go immediately through the judicial route, since the Supreme Court can definitively interpret the constitutional provisions and rules involved,” the constitutional law expert noted.
“But in past disputes like this, the Court has been careful to function as a safety valve only when all options have been exhausted, since premature intervention will risk being seen by the public as partisan—regardless of what lawyers or even the Court insists—and thus its legitimacy as a politically neutral body,” he added to explain.
For Tamase, despite a wrestle for the Senate presidency, there exists a “functional majority” in the chamber, with Senate President pro tempore Sherwin ‘Win’ Gatchalian, serving as acting Senate president, with a majority 12 members. On the other hand, the new minority bloc led by Senator Alan Peter Cayetano has 10 members.
Reacting to the controversy, the UP dean cited that “there doesn’t seem to be a grave urgency yet for the Court to intervene, unless critical developments emerge in the next few days.”
