President Benigno Aquino III and his predecessor former president and incumbent Congresswoman Gloria Macapagal Arroyo virtually locked horns on Thursday as allies of the former leader asked the Supreme Court to scrap Aquino's executive order creating the Truth Commission, the body tasked to investigate the anomalies that occurred during Arroyo's nine years in power. Arroyo's allies called the Truth Commission an “exercise in futility,” saying that it just duplicates the quasi-judicial powers of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice. In their joint 55-page petition, House Minority Leader Edcel Lagman and Representatives Rodolfo Albano Jr., Simeon Datumanong and Orlando Fua Jr. asked the court to issue a temporary restraining order on the enforcement of Executive Order (EO) No. 1, which created the Truth Commission. The petition was the third to be filed at the Supreme Court questioning Aquino's executive orders. Arroyo's allies also questioned Aquino's EO No. 2 revoking Arroyo's “midnight appointments” and his EO No. 3 revoking the granting of Career Executive Service Officer Rank III to government lawyers in the executive department. Supreme Court administrator and spokesman Jose Midas Marquez said the high tribunal will tackle the latest petition in an en banc, or full court, session next Tuesday. The Aquino administration appeared unfazed at the petition, saying Malacanang already anticipated the action that Arroyo's allies would take. Speaking at a press conference, presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda said Malacanang is “more than prepared” to defend its actions, assuring that the Truth Commission stands on solid legal ground. He said the Truth Commission will be the “means” to resolve the corruption controversies that hounded the Arroyo administration including the “Hello Garci” scandal where Arroyo was accused of trying to rig the 2004 presidential elections; the 728-million-peso fertilizer fund scam; and the $329-million ZTE national broadband network deal, which her administration eventually canceled. For her part, Justice Secretary Leila de Lima argued that Arroyo's allies could not question the creation of the Truth Commission since Arroyo herself created investigative bodies such as the Melo, Feliciano, and Zenarosa Commissions during her tenure. De Lima questioned why Arroyo's allies did not question the former President when she formed these bodies. However, Arroyo's allies insisted that the 1987 Philippine Constitution did not allow the President to create public offices, saying this right belongs only to Congress. They argued that the Aquino administration could also not make an example out of the past commissions such as the Feliciano, Melo and Ze?arosa Commissions, since these were not granted full quasi-judicial powers. In their petition, they also claimed that Aquino's EO 1 also violates the equal protection clause prescribed in the Constitution by focusing only on the alleged anomalies during the Arroyo administration. “If eliminating graft and corruption is the noble aim, then equal protection demands that all persons who belong to the same class of suspected or alleged perpetrators of graft and corruption must be investigated and prosecuted equally without regard to personalities and regimes,” the petitioners said, noting that the “commission of graft and corruption was not limited to the Arroyo administration.”
