WHEN is a final decision final?

Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda asked the question as he reacted yesterday to Chief Justice Renato Corona’s condemnation of Malacañang for its perceived meddling in the judiciary and attempt to undermine the high tribunal’s credibility.

Lacierda said that it was the Court that created its “credibility problem” when it recalled what was supposedly already a final ruling on a labor issue involving Philippine Airlines and the Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP). Lacierda said the President is also wondering about the recall.

“When is a final decision final? ‘Yan po ang isang tanong para sa Korte Suprema. When is a final decision final? Kung nagdesisyon na po sila [on] FASAP na final and executory na, bakit biglang magkakaroon ng isang pagbabawi sa desisyon? Hindi [ba] ‘yun nakakasira sa kredibilidad ng Korte Suprema? Sila po ang final arbiter. At kung sila po ay nagsabing final na ang desisyon, ‘di ‘ba final na ‘yun? Parang major, major, may final final,” Lacierda said.

He urged Corona to address the issue on the FASAP controversy.

“We are not going to impose our opinion on the Supreme Court. We would not even make a comment on how they should address it, lest we be accused of intruding or invading their space,” Lacierda said.

He  also insisted that the Chief Justice should no longer bring up differences over the judiciary budget as it’s already a settled issue.

He said the executive department already acceded to the restoration of the judiciary’s funds in its personnel services item, subject to certain conditions.

“Hindi na niya dapat inungkat ang judiciary budget dahil tapos na ‘yun eh. We have a right to think so that it is a diversionary measure,” Lacierda told Palace reporters in his briefing yesterday.

“I’m surprised over the strong words employed by Chief Justice Renato Corona in relation to the issue revolving around the unfilled items in government. This is already a settled issue,” according to budget chief Florencio Abad.

“It is not out of lack of respect for the Judiciary and the Constitutional and Fiscal Autonomy Group (CFAG), nor is it an insidious attempt to undermine their independence, that this budget reform measure is being proposed. On the contrary, it is out of the government’s commitment to pursue transparency and accountability in the use of public funds, including its concern over the repeated failure of agencies of government to fill up items that they had proposed for funding by Congress,”Abad said.

He said the “funds of the CFAG agencies have been restored in their personnel services items. Also, a special provision has been adopted qualifying the use of the funds.”

“I cannot understand why it is still being raised by the Chief Justice. I hope this is not being raised by the Chief Justice to divert people’s attention from current issues that the Supreme Court is being confronted with,” Abad said.