GMA appointed new Chief Justice

[fourtheboys96]

The provision of the 1987 Constitution is not the problem. Constitution is meant to be read and understood by ordinary citizens and not made exclusively for lawyers. The problem arose because the justices who decided in favor of midnight appointment muddled the reading or interpretation by adding and modifying the provision where vagueness is not present. Ang kawawa yung mga law student ngayon na mag-aaral ng bagong doctrine na kinuha sa kalawakan ng kawalan!

There is conflict on two separate provisions of the current constitution. That is why the nine justices were able to interpret it that way they interpreted it.

[Gumusut_Amige]

There is conflict on two separate provisions of the current constitution. That is why the nine justices were able to interpret it that way they interpreted it.

walang bang clause sa constitution natin sa pag interprete ng mga provisions... na pag may conflict ay yung stringent ang mag govern?
just comparing it to project contract specifications na may ganitong clause

[daimengrui]

walang bang clause sa constitution natin sa pag interprete ng mga provisions... na pag may conflict ay yung stringent ang mag govern?
just comparing it to project contract specifications na may ganitong clause

Actually in practice. The law the restricts takes more precedence than the law that allows. IDK why the SC justices opt to overlook/cast a blind eye on this very basic principle in interpreting the law.

They can always turn to journals made by constitutionalists when they drafted the constitution but this is merely a supposition.

[daimengrui]

The provision of the 1987 Constitution is not the problem. Constitution is meant to be read and understood by ordinary citizens and not made exclusively for lawyers. The problem arose because the justices who decided in favor of midnight appointment muddled the reading or interpretation by adding and modifying the provision where vagueness is not present. Ang kawawa yung mga law student ngayon na mag-aaral ng bagong doctrine na kinuha sa kalawakan ng kawalan!

In other words born out of pure imagination.

[tabularasa]

There is conflict on two separate provisions of the current constitution. That is why the nine justices were able to interpret it that way they interpreted it.

There is no conflict. The issue has long been settled as early as 1998. They projected or rather created the conflict so that the grand conspiracy of allowing such midnight appointment can be "legally" justified. In other words, the decision of the Supreme Court allowing such midnight appointment is highly suspect given the jurisprudence which was unanimously decided at that time (1998). There is no compelling circumstance to change such case law. They justified the appointment by classifying the position of chief justice as an exception but every tom, dick and harry will know it's simply BS!

[daimengrui]

Noynoy could be sworn in by lone SC dissenter Justice Conchita Carpio-Morales.

Read her dissenting opinion here:

http://www.pinoysoundingboard.com/20...-appointments/

Ma'am Mabuhay ka!

[fourtheboys96]

There is no conflict. The issue has long been settled as early as 1998. They projected or rather created the conflict so that the grand conspiracy of allowing such midnight appointment can be "legally" justified. In other words, the decision of the Supreme Court allowing such midnight appointment is highly suspect given the jurisprudence which was unanimously decided at that time (1998). There is no compelling circumstance to change such case law. They justified the appointment by classifying the position of chief justice as an exception but every tom, dick and harry will know it's simply BS!

Articles VII and VIII