eK! is electronic Kabalen (eksite.com), a web-exclusive Kapampangan journal of ideas

aida tanglao
aida tanglao US CITIZENSHIP TEST

LABI LA atang lima ring kutang ning immigration and citizenship bureau ning Amerika karing bisang mag-American citizens. Ali nala man masakit, dapot ketang aku medyu mebulul ko o minisip pa anyang karas ketang kutang a "What does the Supreme Court do?" Pekibat kunamu, "It reviews the decisions made by the lower courts or the court of appeals." Bakit mipatuknang ing bilis ning pakibat ku karing kutang a babasan ku king metung a typewriting a binye ning immigration official a mipaintagun a kalupa kung Filipina? Mekad nung ing kutang "What is the Supreme Court o What is the role or job of the Supreme Court?" Apakibat kung agad a "It interprets the law."

Metung pa mekad sangkan ya pin ining apaganaka nining asaliksik ku; king aliwa mu reng ukum ilang babye kabaldugan o mililikas karing buri rang sabyan ding batas. Deng sinumpang sumuyu king pamaalan katungkulan da naman ini.

Deng salita at amanu dakal la kapupuntan at ararapat keng pamisip at pulayi ning pamisip ning tau. Ali mu king neng kayi binang pakabusisyan ing kabaldugan da ring salita at kutang. Ding kalinangan, kultura, denasan at laman ning buntuk ampon ayabut ding tau mamye pamiyalwa karing kabaldugan da ring kutang at amanu. Anya nung tuturu ka reni atyu lang atyu king isip bangkanita ring tuturu o antabayanan mung magpakabyasa ayntindyan daka.

Deng pikabalwan nang mabelwan king batas akakit la ngeni Pilipinas magugulu at susubuk karing paralan bang apangilagan ing mirinan lang sala. Dakal ababalu keni, atin nang mausta at ati nang ali. Mayap nung ali la mu balita ring babasan at darandaman. Ngana nitang metung a aklat "Losing The News", atin kanung kasebyan a ali rana sasabyan ding talabalita ngeni: "Nung balita mu ing babasan mu, map ing ali naka mamasa pin man." O anting makanyan.

Metung karing bayung abalu pauli na ning balita ya pin ing upaya ning Impeachment Court. Dapot atin mu ring makalindu anya mayap ing manintun pang aliwang babasan a apanwalan, bangkanita mausta ing ababalu at ali tamu mililisya king katutwan.

TRULY DEMOCRATIC PEACEFUL REVOLUTION

MARAGUL YA daraptan king yatu ing Pilipinas ngeni, masusubuk ing tibe na at katatagan ning republikang pamaala ding malda. Atyu karing Filipino ngeni nung makananu la apiyabe at apikawani ring atlu nang sanga ning pamaalan a mayayakit munaman karing aliwang bansa. Ing pamagtas, pamanlinis at pamanyagip karing telakaran o government institutions Pilipinas ngeni na magagawa.

Agyang maralas balu na ing mausta, ing tau manintun ya pang makadukit king gintu, printed in gold, at menibat aliwang lugal bayu ya mimasalan ya at manwala. Oini pu ing ikit ko dikil king upaya at papil nang gaganapan ning Impeachment Court. Ali ya matas o mababa king Supreme Court nunge kaya ya mu king Impeachment Court ing upayang ayni. Ing pamaglako o ali king me-impeached. Maka-kaliwa ya karing atlung sanga.(Kalupa nitang sinulat ning metung a abogadung professor kapilan pa.) Malagad mung kapalyaryan ing impeachment trial, dapot tatalangan ya ing Pilipinas kening payapang aklis ning balen bang mibalik ing malinis a lakad ning kapamalan.

INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT CALL

IKIT KUNG pekamalapit paksa king kutang nung sukat yang makyalam ing Supreme Court king Impeachment Court. "Nukarin kami pa munta?" Wa pin masampat mu ing mayari na alang-alang king bansa. Keni ya paganaka ing upaya ring tau, ding memalen. Ding sinumpa anting talapagobra (government employees) at ring sinumpa anting memalayan king sagisag o watawat ning Pilipinas (citizens by birth or by law).

"This, too, is not directly addressed in the Constitution. However, the prevailing view (subject to some disagreement among legal scholars) is that a conviction or acquittal by the Senate is final: Neither the Supreme Court nor any lower court may review or reverse it. That view has not been absolute. Indeed, in 1992 a district court judge reviewed and reversed a Senate decision to convict Judge Alcee Hastings. However, the following year, in the case of Judge Walter Nixon (no relation to the former President), the Supreme Court declined Nixon's request to reverse his conviction by the Senate, stating that the matter was a "political question" not suitable for the courts. (By virtue of the Supreme Court decision, Hastings' conviction was reinstated — the district court judge had no business reviewing the conviction in the first place.)

"If courts were allowed to review and reverse convictions of Presidents, extraordinary situations could develop. First, during the pendency of the President's appeal, it would be unclear who was President. And if he won on appeal, the country would have as President someone who had been impeached by one branch of Congress and convicted by another, then returned to office by an unelected branch. It is hard to imagine a functioning presidency in these circumstances, and most legal scholars applaud the decision of the Supreme Court clarifying that the Senate has the final word on impeachments.

"There is also evidence that the Framers would have approved this Court decision, that they did not intend judicial review of impeachment trials. They gave serious consideration to having impeachment trials conducted and resolved by the Supreme Court, but ended up deciding that the Senate was the more appropriate body. That indicates a conscious decision not to have impeachment decided by the Court, and in the course of the shift they gave no indication that the Court would retain the power to review the Senate's decision.

"Some may argue that the absence of judicial review creates a potential problem of great magnitude: What if the Senate acts unconstitutionally? Isn't the judiciary the branch of government that interprets the Constitution? If so, how can the constitutional process of impeachment be immune from court review?

"But this perspective rests on the misconception that judges are the only government officials who interpret the Constitution. All government officials take an oath to uphold the Constitution, and therefore all must interpret the Constitution in order to act in conformity to it. (Indeed, the Constitution requires senators to take a special oath prior to trying impeachments.) They may get it wrong, just as the Court may, but they are equally bound to apply the Constitution. Thus, for example, if a President thinks a certain criminal statute is unconstitutional, he may (arguably must) pardon people convicted under that law — even if the Supreme Court has upheld the law in question. The President makes an independent judgment call. So do the Senators in an impeachment trial." [http://essential-book.org/books/impeach/#seventeen]


[About the author. Aida Tanglao is a U.S.-based Kapampangan Filipino American. She has lived and worked in different communities in Pampanga, Manila, and in Nigeria when the Philippines was under a regime of civil rights suppression. She studied in various public and private Philippine institutions, went to graduate school in Pampanga, and further attended local colleges in the U.S. Proudly, she is a mother of five and a grandmother to eight. Her personal and educational backgrounds provide the impetus for her to reach out and help in instilling cultural, moral, and historical consciousness among her people and in advocating correct child rearing approaches. She has embraced into her motherhood and patriotic obligations working for the Filipino's aspirations to spiritual and human liberation and contentment. (Metung miparayung Kapampangan mamasa king pamanapse na king Amanung Siswan makayambag yang ditak mu man king kasulung ning ketawan)]

-Posted: 2:55 PM 4/1/12 | More of this author on eK!
Nextnext