Speech of Pres. Aquino at the celebration of the Mabini sesquicentennial (English Translation)

8/12/2019 Speech of Pres. Aquino at the celebration of the Mabini sesquicentennial (English Translation)

1/5

Speech

of

His E xcellency B enigno S. Aquino III

President of the Philippines

At the celebration of the 150th birth anniversary of Apolinario Mabini

Today, as w e commemorate the 150th birth anniversary o f Apolinario Mabini, it is o nly p roperfor u s to recognize his invaluable contributions to building our n ation. Indeed: Mabiniembodies the intelligence of the Filipino peoplean intelligence that he poured into forgingthe very p rinciples a nd systems t hat shaped the being of this f ree nation.

As such, it is i mportant for us to remember today three principles and ideas that Mabini livedout in his lifeideas that we strive to realize in our actions to this very day.

First, Mabini emphasized the importance of a legitimate mandate as the foundation of anygovernment. The strength of the state emanates from its citizens. That is why, under theleadership and guidance of Apolinario Mabini, the very rst local elections in our cou ntrywere held in August 1898. Furthermore, it was M abini himself who led the organization of therst national assembly in Malolos in September of that same year; it was t his a ssembly thatelected Aguinaldo in January 1899, thus replacing the revolutionary government thatdeclared our countrys so vereignty in Kawit on June 12, 1898.

Second: Mabini instilled the idea of p ublic service in our n ational con sciousness. H ebelieved: If power com es from the people, then it is only just that this power be used touphold their interest and welfare.[1] Mabini embodied this conviction even after the revolutionagainst Spain. In the early d ays of our Republic, the nation was immediately asked to faceanother war, this t ime with the Americans. The legislature back then asked: Where will weget the funds for this war? In answer, some members of Congress suggested: We havemoney, which we can lend to government. Mabini did not agree with this. Was this r ightthatthe very persons who would decide whether government could borrow money in order tonance a war would be the same persons who would earn interest from these loans? Wasthis not a conict of interest? Thus, Mabini insisted: No one in a position of power has theright to prot from serving in government.

The third principle held by Mabini is this: P ublic institutions are established for t he sake ofthe people; thus, i t is not right for t hese very same institutions to obstruct t he delivery ofbenets to the people. B efore the Malolos Congress, Mabini made clear the need for t heexecutive branch to act i n a swift, responsive, an d sometimes bold manner, preciselybecause it is t asked with responding to the needs o f the people in the soonest possible time.He also called on the legislature: Let us help one another; let us not t ie the hands of the

executive, so that no opportunity to quickly improve the lot of our people will be wasted.


2/5


3/5

This leads me to a second example. In 2012, the DOJ h ad 100 million pesos for the ManilaHall of Just ice. W e received a letter of r equest from the Supreme Court. Let me read aportion lifted directly from their r esolution:

Wherefore, the court hereby requests the Department of Budget and Management toapprove the transfer of the amount of One Hundred Million Pesos which was included in theDOJ-JUSIP for F iscal Year 201 2 budget for t he Manila Hall of Justice to the budget of the

judiciary, subject tMalabon Hall of Justice.

They were asking us t o transfer to themthe judiciary, a separate branch of governmentthe funds t hat were supposed to be used in the construction of buildings t hat will house thecourts. We see nothing wrong with this, since we know that it would only hasten thedispensation of justice in our country. However, the Supreme Court withdrew their request in

December 2013, when the discussions su rrounding DAP had intensied. Even from theseexamples alone, it is clear that they intended to do a cross-border transfer, or a transfer offunds from one b ranch o f government to a nother.

You might notice that, in all these examples, the executive branch did not initiate or offeranything. We never wished to involve ourselves i n the jurisdiction or exclusive responsibilitiesof other branches o f government; we never asked for anything in return. The only questionwe asked ourselves was: Would this benet our people? If it would help, why should weoppose an opportunity to hasten the delivery o f services t o our Bosses?

Allow me to emphasize: When we undertook DAP, we already had Sections 38, 39, and 49of the Administrative Code as basis. The method we used has likewise been used byprevious administrations. And seeing that the Supreme Court itselfthe institution with theexpertise and the sole mandate to interpret the lawdid it as well, we became morecondent that our method was correct.

In fact, given the clamor and noise surrounding this i ssue, it seems a s i f the true meanings o fsome concepts a re being obscured. The rst such concept is t hat of good faith. Indeed: inordinary situations, g ood faith is used to describe actions driven by good intentions.

However, when we speak of good faith in terms o f the law, it takes o n a deeper meaning,which is: If your actions, whether in the past or present, have a legal basis i n existing laws,then you acted in good faith. To add to this: Even if those laws are declared invalid orunconstitutional in the future, it still cannot be said that you acted in bad faith.

With their decision, it seems a s i f the Supreme Court changed both the rules a nd this l ong-established understanding of good faithand in s o d oing, brought about serious implicationson the work of all those in government. We all recognize: Each member of the executivebranch must make decisions e very d ay. With this f act, we are reminded of Abraham Lincolns

saying, You can please some of the people some of the time; all of the people some of thetime; some of the people all of the time; but you can never please all the people all the time.


4/5

It is only natural that, in the course of se rvice, there are times when our a ctions arequestioned. In the system that prevails in our country, should someone accuse us of anycrime or wrongdoing, it is his obligation to provide proof of this very wrongdoing. For those ingovernment, if you fullled your mandate as p rescribed by law, and in accordance with the

presumption of regularity, then you have nothing to fear. However, with the recent SupremeCourt decision, whenever t he actions of any government employee are questioned, thisemployee now has the obligation to prove that he is innocent of any wrongdoing. Forexample, in the process of bidding out projects, only one bidder can win. Naturally, there areothers who loseand what if these individuals look for loopholes with which to le casesagainst government officials involved in the bidding process? The unfortunate official whomakes t he decision to award the bid now has t o defend himself from lawsuits. How can youwork e fficiently if you constantly h ave to face cases?

Might I ask: Is t here anyone who can live up to standards that have yet to be set? How canyou work, when, with each step you take, you worry about the possibility of imprisonmentbecause you are presumed guilty until proven innocent? Today, because of the SupremeCourt decision, each government official must play a guessing game in predicting if his r ightactions will be considered unconstitutional in the future. Decision making in the executivebecomes d isincentivized, and with this h esitance comes a delay in the delivery o f benets t othe Filipino people. This is the chilling effect that the Supreme Court decision will have ongovernment. I must emphasize: What we call the retroactive effect will truly have a chillingeffect because the standard you were following today, when changed in the future, will resultin the new standards becoming the basis on which you will be judged: How can you be

expected to follow a standard that is ye t to be determined?

When it comes to the law, the Supreme Court has the nal word. We have no plans ofdefying rulings. In truth, we are following not only the primary points in the decision; we arealso acting in consideration of all the opinions that accompanied it.

Even then, we must never forget that, just as A polinario Mabini said, whatever power held byany leader in any branch of government comes from the people. Thus, we are all asked topush for any and all actions that redound to the benet of our Bosses. This principle is whythe executive branch has led a Motion for Reconsideration, which includes all thearguments I have outlined today and in the past. This is a course of action our laws andsystems allow us to take. Th is is a chance to ensure that each and every argument isevaluated carefully, so that we can avoid decisions that may adversely affect our people. Themotion for reconsideration is a just act, one that follows due process. I t provides a goodopportunity to once again lay down all the facts on the tableensuring that those renderingdecisions have the chance to appreciate the points that may have been overlooked in thepast, and the well-reasoned arguments t hat will strengthen all sides.

I have to admit: there are times when I envy those who can focus their full attention on a

single advocacy. Sometimes, I envy my co lleagues in government, who are entrusted with amandate for only o ne aspect of society. As t he father of our nation, I am obliged to consider


5/5

the wholethe big pictureat al l times, beca use my decisions on one sector invariablyaffect ot hers as well. It is likewise my obligation to shed light on this issue, and help ourhonorable justices u nderstand, especially because their decision has g rave implications notonly in the executive, judicial, or legislative branch, but also and more importantly on the

entire country. It is m y o bligation to help my B osses a chieve clarity o f thought, and impart tothem the necessary information, so that all can see what is right and what is j ust. This is howwe choose to follow the example set by Apolinario Mabinihe who said, We are bound byone fate, by the s ame joys and sorrows, and by common a spirations a nd interests.[2]

Thank you, and good day.

Documents

Speech of Pres. Aquino at the celebration of the Mabini sesquicentennial (English Translation)