"Screaming Justice"

She will go down in history as the Chief Justice of the Scream Court. -Manuel Buencamino.

We submit that a person who is emotionally or psychologically unstable, prone to fits uncontrolled rage, lacking in patience and empathy, ruthless with the feeling of fellow human beings, bereft of civility and uncaring about decorum does not deserve a place in your honorable court. - from Neil Quinio's letter to International Criminal Court.

Should we allow a Fellow Filipino, a former Regional Trial Court Judge, and a senator of the Republic to be one of the judges of an International Criminal Court? The answer would be a big and proud yes. But should we allow it when that person is arrogant, boastful, full of anger, deficient in ethical standard, and one who is always on the wrong side of the fence of justice during her country's critical moments? Some people say, "let her go", it will be a relief to lose a pain in the ass public figure like her; but on the other hand, some people ask, should we let go a potential national disgrace?

Her track record shows that during former President Joseph Estrada's impeachment, she was one of those majority senators who refused to open a controversial envelope that triggered the "2nd EDSA Revolution".

And during Chief Justice Renato Corona's Impeachment Trial, on February 13, 2012, 13 senators raised their hands to vote against the opening of Corona's dollar accounts, which was the vital evidence of the trial; needless to say, she is one of those 13 senators who refuse to disclose that vital evidence. Would they have allowed its disclosure, the impeachment would have finished earlier and we would have saved precious breath and time.

And finally on Judgment Day of that Trial, together with a fellow Gloria Macapagal Arroyo supporter, Joker Arroyo, and Bongbong Marcos, whose request for a hero's burial of his former President father was rejected by President Noynoy Aquino; understandably, she voted against the conviction verdict of the majority 20 senators. For her vote I hope for a miracle; and as if she was talking to me, after she explain her vote she asked, "Would you be surprise if I vote not guilty?" With her long discourse before she cast her not guilty vote I was not at all surprised. But I know, and with sadness I traced in her voice that she is aware that her vote is a nail in the coffin of one who is politically dead.

When she furiously explained her not guilty vote, She asked God for another life to fight corruption; ironically, while up to the last minute, with all her skills, rhetoric, knowledge, and wrath she is trying so hard protecting a perceived by majority of her people to be a corruption tainted person. She asks for another life when Providence had already given her ample years in the Senate where she could have executed such task. Her senate track record against corruption showed that not only she is incapable; but also, she does not have that iron will, which she portrays and wants us to believe she has. 

As if everything is under her disposal, for to articulate her negative vote and anger, she even mentioned and used God when she prayed for another life for her to execute her vengeance against corruption. As if God is not aware of those things and not in control. As if she is the most clean and incorruptible among the politicians, that she is not a crony and a protector of a dishonest government official. And as if she is always truthful and never lies.

I listen to her attentively when she is sober and not under the influence of some unknown force; and I noticed that she can be as sweet and as knowledgeable as anyone.  The maxim "the more you hate the more you love" (the more knowledgeable one is, the more ignorant that person become) is applicable to her. HOW GOOD SHE IS, IS EQUAL TO HOW BAD SHE BECOMES. The trouble with this truism is that, it is hard for anyone who is covered with anger (ignorance) to perceive his own ignorance, and she is indeed a trouble incarnate for anger is what controls her most of the time.

I personally believe that the woman, who I must admit is brilliant and who in her own words directly and indirectly claim that she is intelligent and knowledgeable; not only at times has no capacity to see the truth, but also has the inherent tendency and cunning ability to complicate things, twist the truth, and avoid its disclosure. Any such kind of person, and if indeed she is, has no right whatsoever to occupy a seat in a court of justice of any land. But I maybe wrong, and everyone is entitled to the most precious benefit of the doubt. And I hope that in that place where there is no politics, where the only motive of her decisions is justice, where she has no binding and personal interest, and where hopefully she has no chance to bully no one is where she rightfully belongs.

We are as good as how evil we can become.