Executive branchs internship programs now open

Posted on Thursday, April 07, 2011 by Rafael Alonso

Formatted: Font: (Default) Times New Roman, 12 pt, Font color: Dark Blue

Image via Wikipedia Statement of Presidential Spokesperson Edwin Lacierda: On the internship programs in the executive branch of the Philippine government [Delivered during a press briefing in Malacaang on April 7, 2011] This year, the Presidential Communications Development and Strategic Planning Office started an internship program for college students who would like to gain more experience in public service. Likewise, thirteen other government agencies opened the door of public service to the Filipino youth. These include big agencies such as theDepartment of Education, the Department of Foreign Affairs, and the Department of National Defense. With these internship programs, the government hopes to capitalize on the creative energy and the idealism of our youth, and to give training to future leaders, in order to help bring about genuine change. The other agencies with internship programs: The National Economic Development Agency, the Department of Interior and Local Government, the Department of Labor and Employment, the Metropolitan Manila Development Authority, the Department of Tourism, the Department of Public Works and Highways, the Department of Trade and Industry, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources, the Department of Transportation and Communication, and the Presidential Management Staff.

Executive Branch officials to testify

By TJ Burgonio Philippine Daily Inquirer First Posted 02:26:00 02/07/2009 Filed Under: Government, PDEA-DOJ bribery issue

MANILA, Philippines?President Macapagal-Arroyo has given clearance to officials of the Executive Branch to attend the inquiry into the drug-related bribery scandal by an independent committee. In Administrative Order No. 252, Ms Arroyo made clear that all officials and employees of the Executive Branch should attend the hearings, answer questions and submit documents if required by the committee. ?All heads of offices shall ensure the prompt cooperation, assistance and attendance of their officials or employees who may be invited as resource persons by the committee,? she said in her Jan. 29 order. Ms Arroyo created the panel to look into allegations that prosecutors had been bribed into dismissing a drug case against three young wealthy men, known as ?Alabang Boys.? In the order, she also enjoined the Department of Justice, Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency, National Bureau of Investigation, and all executive offices to cooperate with the fact-finding body. The panel, composed of former Associate Justices Carolina Grio-Aquino and Raoul Victorino, and San Beda law dean Fr. Ranhillo Aquino opened its inquiry on Thursday.

Executive, legislative branches urged to oppose SC

By Maila Ager
INQUIRER.net
10:55 am | Monday, November 21st, 2011 14share1551 1533

MANILA, Philippines Senator Francis Kiko Pangilinan has urged the executive and legislative branches of government to stand up and oppose the Supreme Court. Pangilinan said the two branches must come together to ensure that a wayward judiciary is put in its proper place. No, this is not anarchy. This is democracy at work. This is checks and balances at work. It is the sworn duty of the executive and the legislative departments to act as a check on a wayward judiciary, he said in a statement on Monday. Whether it is the legislative or the executive branch, to stand up and oppose the Supreme Court is to fulfill our constitutional duty to serve as a check on a co-equal branch, he said. Pangilinan pointed out the Supreme Courts alleged failure to restore the peoples faith and respect for justice system and its almost-whimsical and arbitrary exercise of judicial authority in a number of recent cases. He specifically cited the latest clash between the executive and the judiciary over the travel ban issue of former President and now Pampanga Representative Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The case, he said, was a test to the limits of constitutional democracy. The old ways and old approaches in our efforts to fight corruption have failed us. The system of justice has by and large failed to ensure respect for the rule of law. This explains why lawlessness and disregard for the rule of law continue to plague us, said the senator. The Supreme Court, in quite a number of recent decisions, most unfortunately, has not helped much in restoring faith and respect for our justice system. In fact, it has courted insubordination and disrespect for its almost-whimsical and arbitrary exercise of judicial authority in a number of recent cases, he pointed out. Pangilinan then cited the case of Justice Secretary Leila de Lima, who is facing contempt charges for defying the temporary restraining order issued by the high tribunal against the travel ban on the former president. The Supreme Court,he said, should think long and hard before it punishes De Lima. They may have to cite many others in contempt and there wont be enough jails in the land to place all those who have grown sick and tired of the pervasive corruption and inutility in the justice system we have all come to know all these years now, said the senator.

SC-Senate showdown?
There is a looming showdown between the Supreme Court and the Senate as an Impeachment Court starting tomorrow. The defense team of Chief Justice Renato Corona is poised to raise to the Supreme Court any incidental ruling the Impeachment Court may issue, in case the defense team finds such ruling as having been exercised with grave abuse of discretion. Thus, Corona and his legal team are ready to do battle and bring the impeachment matter to their own turfthe Supreme Court. Under the Constitution, the Supreme Court is endowed with powers to strike down any order or ruling that has been exercised with grave abuse of discretion. Section 1, Article VIII of the constitution outlines the Supreme Courts power which includes the power to determine whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction on the part of any branch or instrumentality of the government. On the basis of this specific constitutional power, the Court can even check acts of Congress and of the President, but with great hesitation, says one case. However, the question is raised: Can the Supreme Court strike out an order or ruling by an Impeachment Court? The Supreme Court should be careful. It would be treading on dangerous grounds. First, the Impeachment Court and the Supreme Court are equal in their creations. They are both courts of constitutional creation. In that sense, they are equal. No one is above the other. Second, the two constitutional courts exercise different powers. The Supreme Court acts to respond to judicial questions. The Impeachment Court acts to respond to political questions. Third, the Constitution specifies the bodies over which the Supreme Court can determine the presence or absence of any grave abuse of discretion. The Supreme Court can determine whether or not there is grave abuse of discretion on any branch or instrumentality of the government. The Impeachment Court, a unique, constitutionally created specie, cannot be referred to as a branch of government. The branch of government referred to is the legislative branch. While the Impeachment Court is composed of senators, it is not a legislative branch because the Impeachment Court is not exercising legislative power under Article VII, but a power under Article XI of the constitution, Under the Article VII of constitution, the legislative branch, the Congress, must be composed of both the House and the Senate. The Impeachment Court is not a legislative branch because it is only composed of senators. Also, the Impeachment Court is not an instrumentality of the government. The administrative code refers to an instrumentality as an agency of the National Government, not integrated within the department framework vested within special functions or jurisdiction by law, endowed with some if not all corporate powers, administering special funds, and enjoying operational autonomy, usually through a charter. This term includes regulatory agencies, chartered institutions and government-owned or controlled corporations. Obviously, an instrumentality of the government is one of lower level creation by law (through a charter), and not by the constitution. Thus, it can credibly posited that the Supreme Court cannot exercise judicial power over the Impeachment Court. If the defense team of CJ Corona will seek refuge in the Supreme Court, it is possible that the Impeachment Court will simply vote to reject and rebuff the Supreme Courts order, so that trial shall forthwith proceed, as the constitution specifically mandates. The impeachment court should be allowed to sail freely, blown by winds that draw force from specific constitutional command. If the Supreme Court scuttles this constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court itself may be culpably violating the constitution, and may subject participating members to impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives. The people have devised a constitutional scheme to specifically evaluate certain high ranking officials to see if they are fit to remain in office. It is a power constitutionally lodged in the impeachment court. It augurs well for our democratic processes to respect this constitutional mechanism, and allow it to do its job.