Quote Originally Posted by Altis6453 View Post
Here's a reproduction of his column, "The Sounding Board" today care of Inquirer.net:




Quite interesting was that, in a previous column Fr. Bernas has said he wouldn't pass upon the merits of the Articles of Impeachment but eventually did so in today's edition.

Also, Fr. Bernas recognized that the appointment of Corona during the 60 day prohibitive period during elections to be wrong and yet he accedes to it because the Supreme Court says that the appointment is valid despite the clear language of the Constitution which says:

"Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety."

When courts of law, most especially the SC, starts to use constitutional draftsmanship to twist the import and meaning of the Constitution in order to circumvent what is prohibited, it has effectively subverted its judicial power in order to accommodate the rise to power of a single person who, in this case, happens to be the incumbent Chief Justice.

Just reading the above provision over and over, you can't help but feel that the SC is telling us, "you're dumb if you think this applies to us".
That's the reason why majority don't buy the SC's take on the legal CJ appointment inspite it being done within the prohibited period.

SC: No the prohibition doesn't apply to us.

People: Who will benifit the decision?

SC: US!

Nganga!