21/03/2025
Fyi
The DOJ Secretary’s Dangerous Attack on the Rule of Law
By OPTIC Politics DEPO | March 21, 2022
The statement made by the Secretary of the Department of Justice (DOJ) is not only an irresponsible generalization but also a blatant attempt to discredit the very institution he is sworn to uphold. By recklessly claiming that there has been a “failure of our justice system for a long time,” he is not just making an accusation—he is deliberately undermining the judiciary, law enforcement, and the rule of law itself. If such a failure truly existed in the sweeping manner he suggests, then it would also be a direct indictment of his own department, its predecessors, and the entire government apparatus that he now represents.
A Politically-Motivated Statement Disguised as Reform
This statement reeks of political opportunism rather than a sincere critique of the legal system. By making such a broad and vague assertion, the DOJ Secretary is setting the stage for an agenda that is neither grounded in facts nor in legal precedent but in pure political maneuvering. Is he suggesting that all past decisions, rulings, and legal proceedings were inherently flawed? If so, is he prepared to invalidate every conviction, every acquittal, and every judgment rendered by the courts? His reckless words betray an intent not to reform the justice system, but to erode public trust in it—perhaps to justify future actions that seek to manipulate or control legal outcomes for political gain.
The Judiciary: Not a Tool for Personal or Political Vendettas
The justice system is built upon laws, precedents, and due process. It does not operate on whims or populist sentiments. To suggest a “longtime failure” without offering a shred of evidence or a specific legal foundation is an insult to the courts, the judges, and the very Constitution he is meant to protect. The judiciary does not, and should not, bow to the shifting rhetoric of politicians. It is guided by the law—not by the DOJ Secretary’s opinion.
If his claim is to be taken seriously, where is the judicial proof of systemic failure? Where are the Supreme Court rulings that validate his sweeping assertion? The truth is, there are none—because his statement is not based on law but on political posturing.
Legal Precedent and Accountability
Article VIII, Section 1 of the Philippine Constitution guarantees judicial independence, stating that the judiciary must operate “free from political influence or pressure.” The DOJ Secretary’s statement, by its nature, is an attempt to pressure the judiciary into aligning with his narrative—a clear violation of this constitutional mandate.
Furthermore, if there were failures in the justice system, then these should be addressed through legal reforms, case reviews, and judicial oversight—not through careless statements that paint the entire system as defective. If he truly believes in due process, he should be presenting concrete cases of miscarriage of justice, not vague declarations that serve no legal purpose but to tarnish institutions.
A Dangerous Precedent: Who Benefits from This Attack on the Judiciary?
Who stands to gain from this reckless accusation? If the DOJ Secretary is paving the way to discredit past judicial rulings, then what is stopping him from using this rhetoric to justify legal actions against political opponents? This is not just an attack on the judiciary—it is a veiled warning to those who stand in the way of his political interests. If the public allows this dangerous precedent to take root, then what comes next? Will every court decision be questioned and reversed based on the shifting moods of political appointees?
Final Take: The Judiciary is Not Blind, But Neither is the Public
The courts do not operate with blind eyes, nor will they be easily swayed by reckless accusations from the executive branch. The justice system is imperfect, like any human institution, but it is governed by laws—not by baseless rhetoric. The DOJ Secretary’s statement is a blatant attempt to rewrite history, delegitimize legal precedents, and ultimately create an environment where legal decisions are dictated by those in power rather than by the rule of law.
If there was a “failure of our justice system,” it is precisely in allowing figures like him to weaponize justice for political ends. The judiciary must not only reject such accusations—it must stand firm against any attempt to subvert its independence.
