The Rule of Law is Under Siege

This is a screenshot from this page of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines’ Website:

In your words:

The rule of law, in its most basic form, simply means no one is above the law. In a more profound sense, the rule of law attempts to protect the rights of citizens from arbitrary and abusive use of government power.”

My question is this, what can The Integrated Bar of the Philippines do when the Philippines is breaking, twisting and perverting an International Agreement? Can the people seek relief from the Judiciary in this matter?

UPDATE: This post was inspired by @bigenya’s tweet. She was wondering if the IBP elders could help out.


  1. Renato Pacifico

    What good are laws in the PHilippines if pekeng-peryodistas are idioting us?

    Take for example this one-way justice system. Halili and Quinto can be sued by people of the philippines for adulterations.

    They know very well that Kho is married and the pekeng-peryodistas are so mum about Halili and Quinto brought to justice.

    POLITICS AND JUSTICE IS NOT MY MEAT. Politics and Justice only exisit if it’s covered by stupid pekeng-peryodistas!

  2. jcc

    “Rule of Law Under Siege” . hahahahhahahrhrrhaaahhr, bwaaaaaahaahaaaaa…

    IBP is composed of picayune talents and corrupt invidivuals… It should start liquidating all those IPB Membership dues to the public and render an accounting.

    In my motion for reconsideration filed with the SC, I argued:

    Atty. Camano agrees with anyone who claims that the law profession is littered with charlatans, scoundrels and incompetents that deserve to be purged from the profession. It is time now that the IBP looks no further than the four corners of its walls in Ortigas Office Complex.

    The IBP or its lawyers were incorrigibly slow and exceedingly picayune not to realize that if a chattel was levied upon, it has been brought under the jurisdiction of the court and it is known in law as in “custodia legis

  3. jcc

    Rule of Law… Pweeehhhh!!

  4. Primer

    You sound very much close to a ‘misplaced’ idealist.

    Has it become the case (just for you) as – “I (jcc) am okay, but the world is not okay”?

    What for instance must stop a well-meaning individual to have to receive a response from the Chief Justice no less from whatever letter or document he has submitted to the SC chief?

    Can he not hold the SC chief accountable or culpable in case he simply disregards a formal inquiry?

  5. BongV


    i feel your rage kabayan 😆

  6. jcc


    IBP, like the SC do not sit in an ivory tower. They look at the law to serve their own bias.

    On your query, this is my answer: It is possible for someone to pretend that a legit query is not raised hoping hoping that it will simply go away.

    But here is one you should ponder: I am not charge to the government treasury, (translation: hindi ako palamunin ng taong bayan). Your distinguished jurists are charge to the government treasury (translation: “palamunin ng bayan”). They should be made answerable to a higher degree of accountability, unlike yours truly.

    But here is the rub: I am not corrupt as you think I am while majority of our jurists are. You just have to read my book and my blog if you are interested in finding the answer to your charge that “i am a misplaced idealist”.

  7. Primer


    Certainly, no one intends to offend but to the extent that when we expressed worlviews, we automatically create various other impressions – an area can be cleared in more than open, willing discussions. FV is the forum.

    So, the SC can play deaf and blind to a query from any individual, this despite being paid awesome amount of money?

    For one, even perhaps after reading your book or blogs, the reader does not have to bite the bait – hook, line, and sinker – must he? In short, we will have to take your view with a grain of salt, would that be fair?

  8. jcc


    you called me a “misplaced idealist” and the insinuation is not simply about taking my position with a grain of salt. you were already taking the position of the SC. but i do not begrudge you for that. different folks, different strokes.

    all you have to do then is to put down that feigned objectivity and show your true color of being the sycophant of the SC. there is no dishonor in that if you believe that within your heart.

    but do not begrudge others who have contrary perception.

    btw, before you discuss topics like freedom of the press and pornography law, make sure that you make some research. the readers are expecting so much from regular bloggers like you and you would not want them to feel being shortchanged everytime they read your post.

Comments are closed.