Congress should also take a second look at the budget of the Supreme Court used in maintaining the costly and luxurious vacation villas in Baguio City
Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra wants an additional P10-million added to his office’s annual budget for 2024.
That additional burden to the taxpayers is just for one simple task the Office of the Solicitor General is already expected to do so for free anyway.
Guevarra claims he formed a panel of experts who will study the legal options available to the Philippine government regarding the country’s on-going maritime dispute with China in the West Philippine Sea.
The communist government in Beijing claims numerous islets, shoals and reefs in the West Philippine Sea. Pursuant to the United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), those islets, shoals and reefs are within the exclusive economic zone of the Philippines, and are, therefore, Philippine territory.
China’s purported basis for its illegal seizure and occupation of Philippine territory in the disputed area is a self-serving nine-dash-line delineation system which China made available to the world only after the United States closed its military and naval bases in the Philippines in 1992.
In 2016, the International Arbitral Tribunal in the Netherlands rejected Beijing’s nine-dash-line delineation system as contrary to international law. The Tribunal also upheld the rights of the Philippines in the disputed area.
As expected of the communist bully, China does not recognize the Tribunal’s pronouncement, despite Beijing being a signatory to the UNCLOS.
Despite the Tribunal’s ruling, Chinese naval vessels harass Philippine ships patrolling the West Philippine Sea.
Manila’s resort to diplomacy with Beijing has been responded to by the communists with empty rhetoric and breached agreements.
Being the law firm of the national government, the OSG has been tasked to study the legal options available to the Philippines in line with Manila’s legal victory in the international arbitral tribunal.
The OSG has enough materials on public international law, particularly the UNCLOS, as well as pertinent treaties Manila has signed with other countries, including the country’s Mutual Defense Treaty with the United States.
It also has the full cooperation of the Department of Foreign Affairs and the Department of National Defense in terms of accessing legal experts and research materials on the maritime dispute with Beijing.
Undoubtedly, the lawyers in the OSG are among the highest paid legal minds working in the government bureaucracy today.
While the compensation of OSG lawyers is not as gargantuan as what Secretary of Finance Benjamin Diokno gets (as one of the highest paid government officials in the land enjoying a compensation package higher than that of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr.), the compensation arrangement for OSG lawyers is enough to retain some competent lawyers within that office’s payroll.
Pursuant to the law creating it, the OSG has the duty to provide the national government with the legal advisory it needs regarding the maritime dispute with China.
Why then does Guevarra want an addtional P10-million for work his office is legally expected to render to the government at no additional cost in the first place?
In short, even without the additional P10-million Guevarra wants, the OSG is well equipped and funded enough to prepare a thorough study on the legal options of the Philippine government in light of the arbitral ruling in Manila’s favor.
Why then does Guevarra want P10-million more of the taxpayers’ money just to study the government’s legal options regarding the situation in the West Philippine Sea?
Speaking of budgetary allocations for government offices, the Supreme Court, speaking through its court administrator, wants the Senate to give it at least P150-million more for its 2024 annual budget costing P71.97-million.
That amount, the court administrator said, is for maintaining “judiciary marshals” to protect judges, justices and other court personnel as contemplated under Republic Act 11691.
Taxpayers believe that “judiciary marshals” is a euphemism for a “private army,” so to speak, within the judicial department of government.
The constitutionality of that arrangement is suspect because the task of ensuring the safety of government officials is a matter of law enforcement, and is thus within the exclusive realm of the executive department of the government.
Congress should consider repealing Republic Act 11691 because law enforcement should be the exclusive concern of police personnel, and not by a “private army” paid for by taxpayers’ hard-earned money.
In lieu of “judiciary marshals,” Congress should instead add more to the budget of the Philippine National Police so the latter can assign more police personnel to secure the safety of judicial officials and court personnel.
Congress should also take a second look at the budget of the Supreme Court used in maintaining the costly and luxurious vacation villas in Baguio City.
Those “cottages” are used exclusively by the justices of the Supreme Court at huge taxpayers’ expense.
What is it that the Supreme Court must do in Baguio that it can’t do in Manila in the first place?