![[Just Saying] Diminished impact of SC Trillanes decision and Trillanes’ remedy](https://i.headtopics.com/images/2024/4/5/rapplerdotcom/just-saying-diminished-impact-of-sc-trillanes-deci-just-saying-diminished-impact-of-sc-trillanes-deci-5598A368664EEAF5DBAA0DBBA868BEF1.webp)
Why did the Supreme Court not decide this case during then-president Duterte’s reign of power? Had it been decided at that time, it would have been more significant, asseverating that a sitting president with all his authority was not above the law, much more the Constitution.
This is AI generated summarization, which may have errors. For context, always refer to the full article.
On a technicality therefore, former Senator Trillanes who was already considered innocent by force of law via the amnesty, was again sought to be indicted for the commission of a crime which has already been “put into oblivion.” On September 6, 2018, former Senator Trillanes went up to the Supreme Court seeking a temporary restraining order to stop the implementation of Proclamation No. 572. Swiftly, on September 11, 2018, the Supreme Court denied Trillanes’ plea for a TRO. This was at a time when the animosity between former president Duterte and former senator Trillanes was at its height, as most people also witnessed.
The Supreme Court decision is laudable. There is just one glaring oddity that seems to pique the curiosity of many. People might also wonder about the possible reasons for holding the decision in abeyance. Could it be the “fear factor” of a powerful president that has affected a co-equal great department of government? Some might even venture to speculate that the non-decision during Duterte’s time was due tofor their appointments. If all these were true, then it does not speak well of the Supreme Court which must be without fear nor favor.
Significantly, the unconstitutional Proclamation No. 572 issued by then-president Rodrigo Duterte was not a general declaration but a directed one targeting only a single person: Trillanes. Following the guideline in thecase, for former senator Trillanes to hold former president Duterte and other officials liable, he “must show a wrong which he specially or particularly suffered.
Aquino Administration Duterte Administration Supreme Court Of The Philippines Thought Leaders Editors' Pick Voices
Philippines Latest News, Philippines Headlines
Similar News:You can also read news stories similar to this one that we have collected from other news sources.
Supreme Court upholds validity of Trillanes’ amnesty, rebuking Duterte orderThe Supreme Court rules that then-president Rodrigo Duterte's move to nullify then-senator Trillanes' amnesty is unconstitutional
Read more »
SC upholds amnesty granted to Trillanes, says Duterte revocation unconstitutionalMANILA, Philippines: The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that the amnesty granted to former senator Antonio Trillanes 4th in 2019 was valid.
Read more »
SC strikes down Duterte's proclamation revoking Trillanes’ amnestyThe Supreme Court ruled in favor of former Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, affirming the validity of his amnesty and deeming the proclamation revoking it unconstitutional.
Read more »
Supreme Court says amnesty granted to Trillanes is valid, bindingDefining the News
Read more »
SC ipinawalambisa 'amnesty revocation' ni Duterte vs TrillanesIdineklarang 'unconstitutional' ng Korte Suprema ang proklamasyon ni dating Pangulong Rodrigo Duterte na nagbabasura sa amnestiyang iginawad noon kay ex-Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV.
Read more »
Duterte revocation of Trillanes amnesty unconstitutionalThe Supreme Court has voided an order issued by former president Rodrigo Duterte revoking the amnesty granted to former senator Antonio Trillanes IV.
Read more »