Call for sobriety, respect and unconditional obedience to the rule of law.

Excerpt from the Privilege Speech of Rep. Elpidio F. Barzaga, Jr., 4th District of Cavite, March 11, 2014:

Not to be overlooked is the undermining effect of the 

adverted recognition of the powers of the COMELEC, an 

independent, constitutionally-created body, to exercise 

direct control and supervision over a subordinate body. 

More importantly, the House, by its act, challenges the 

constitutionally rooted authority of the Supreme Court as the 

final arbiter of all legal issues and in the process, trifles with 

the system of checks and balances, as a corollary of a basic 

tenet of our government system—the separation of powers 

between and among the Legislative, Executive and Judicial 

branches of government. 

Rep. Elpidio F. Barzaga, Jr., 4th District of Cavite

Whether or not we agree with this proposition, the 

Supreme Court is supreme, being entrusted exclusively with 

the judicial power to adjudicate with finality all justiciable 

disputes. No other department may pass upon its judgments 

or declare them unjust. Any lawyer worth his salt—and the 

House has its share of legal scholars—will tell us that the 

power of the Supreme Court lies in and is exercised through 

its decisions and pronouncements which, in appropriate 

cases, form part of the laws of the land; and because of 

this postulate, compliance with the High Court’s final and 

executory decisions cannot be made to depend on the option, 

or worse still, the whim of the parties.

The problem confronting the House and its leadership 

has simply ceased to be a controversy involving a contest or 

power struggle between the Supreme Court and this Chamber. 

It has evolved into the matter of safeguarding the majesty of 

the Constitution, upholding the rule of law, and ensuring the 

preservation of the Republic. If we, elected Members of the 

House for political or personal consideration, were allowed 

to cross the line within which we are required by law to 

operate in the discharge of our office, then the law would be 

a farce, a pure jargon, without meaning at all. If we continue 

to defy the long and final Supreme Court decision, we would 

be in the process of inciting or fomenting disobedience to 

the Constitution. 

To think that each of us has sworn to defend it! So, are 

we willing to be a party to this disaster? Do we want to be 

remembered as the Congress which blatantly trampled on 

the rule of law? 

Former Chief  Justice Artemio V. Panganiban

Anyone may disagree with, even criticize as some of 

our distinguished colleagues have done, Supreme Court 

pronouncements, but we cannot take away that right from 

them. As former Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban aptly 

wrote in his Phililppine Daily Inquirer article, and I quote:

 Criticize, yes; disobey, no. Rule of law. True; 

legislators have a right to disagree with the court. 

However, such right is not a license to disobey the 

court. 

 Indeed, we have all the right to disagree but 

not to disobey. This is especially true for litigants 

who seek interventions of the court. They cannot 

refuse to disobey on the guise that in their opinion, 

the court is wrong. 

 Yes, Congressmen may criticize, attack and 

bemoan. But I respectfully submit that under the rule 

of law, they are duty-bound to follow the decisions 

of the court whether they agree with these or not. 

As a Member of this august Chamber, I am concerned 

with the repercussions of the path we are taking. Now, this 

institution, a coequal and a co-independent body, is defying 

the High Court. Are we now sending a message, outrageous 

as it is, that it is not wrongful to disregard the Judiciary? How 

soon will it take before the Executive Department follows 

suit—a judicial determination of the unconstitutionality of 

a law or an executive order is being ignored, and the void 

law or executive order is still being implemented? Following 

the lead of this Chamber and the Executive Branch, the day 

will come when all losing litigants before the Supreme Court 

will just sit back and simply refuse to comply with each 

decision, thereby inviting a breakdown of peace and order and 

contempt for the law. May that day never come when anarchy 

reigns, when the stability of the government institutions is 

endangered and eventually, our democratic system and the 

Republic itself disintegrate. 

Let us not then turn a blind eye to the real issue on this 

matter and the constitutional crisis we are creating. The 

Supreme Court has spoken with finality. I appeal to the reason 

and sense of fair play of every Member in this honorable 

Chamber to uphold the rule of law and the Constitution. I 

urge everyone, regardless of political affiliation, to abide 

by the final decision of the Court and recognize Mr. Lord 

Allan Velasco as the legitimate Representative of the good 

people of the Lone District of Marinduque. It is simply the 

right thing to do. 

It is high time, as a matter of duty of a Filipino citizen, 

to sound the clarion call for total respect and obedience to 

the rule of law for the sake of our beloved country and the 

future of our fellow Filipinos.