speech delivered by chief justice maria lourdes p. a...
TRANSCRIPT
1
Speech delivered by Chief Justice Maria Lourdes P. A. Sereno during the
Awarding of Scholarships under the Foundation for Liberty and Prosperity
(FLP) Scholarship Program on December 1, 2016 at the University of the
Philippines Bonifacio Global City Campus, Taguig City
Thank you, friends. Please take your seats. Good evening to all of you. May I
please first start with saying that indeed, this is a very, very important occasion that
I am attending simply because I think it will be the presage of something that is
grand in our lifetime. So allow me to first acknowledge Chief Justice Artemio [V.]
Panganiban whose tireless effort to contribute to the rule of law can be seen in his
manifold activities all the way from being the leader of an important foundation, to
his very thoughtful columns, to participating continuously in Supreme Court
activities when asked to do so. Gratis et amore, Chief Justice.
To (Ret.) Justice Delilah [V.] Magtolis (Chief, PHILJA Academic Affairs Office)
and (Ret.) Marina [L.] Buzon (PHILJA Executive Secretary), my colleagues in the
judiciary and [those] who are now serving the judiciary in the capacities of very
important officers of the Philippine Judicial Academy, good evening. Mrs. Evelyn
Toledo-Dumdum, (President, Foundation for Liberty and Prosperity [FLP]), whom
everybody knows as Evelyn, the ever reliable person who is facilitating everything
that is important to judicial reform for more than a decade now. I have so many
stories that I can share with you about how she has been very, very important in the
life of the judiciary even if she is not a lawyer, but she loves justice by heart.
(Lyceum of the Philippines University College of Law) Dean [Ma. Soledad] “Sol” [D.]
Mawis, the president of the Philippine Association of Law Schools, and the various
deans who are here now—may I ask all the deans to please rise and be
acknowledged as well. Atty. [Ma. Cecilia] “Cecile” [L.] Pesayco of Tan Yan Kee
Foundation and Madam [Juanita Tan Lee], the [assistant] treasurer of the Tan Yan
2
Kee Foundation. I’m really sorry, of course, Assistant Ombudsman Jennifer [J.]
Manalili, thank you very much for your wonderful introduction. That was exactly
how I wanted it. Thank you.
Professor Ryan [P.] Oliva, who is representing Dean Danilo [L.] Concepcion,
soon to be sworn in as president of UP (University of the Philippines), thank you for
the generosity that the dean and the faculty of the College of Law of UP and UP at the
Fort have shown us by hosting this important occasion. And most important of all,
the awardees, the 11 brilliant young scholars who just shared the stage with me, as
well as their parents and loved ones. It is to them that we should give the biggest
round of applause. (applause)
Before anything else, let me say that I admire the staff and partners of the
Foundation for Liberty and Prosperity (FLP) for all their hard work and
professionalism in administering the FLP Scholarship Program. Of course, the
excellence of this idea comes from no less than the prolific mind of retired Supreme
Court Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban. So allow me to tell you that his very
creative imagination has been put to use in many arenas including advising this
present Chief Justice on many of her problems. So I thank you, Chief. This is just a
very small contribution on my part to your continuing effort in turn. We, Chief
Justice Panganiban and I, share a soft spot for law students and the need to
encourage, support, and recognize their academic achievements as well as the
formation of their ethics and values and motivation for nation-building, starting
with the period of their initial legal studies. Like our 11 winners, both of us were
also fortunate to be the recipients of scholarships in law school at the time when we
needed help the most.
3
And therefore, I would also like to acknowledge the fact that this night would
have not happened were it not for the very important contribution of my fellow
jurors in those competitions, Atty. Pesayco, Dr. [Edilberto C.] de Jesus (former
Department of Education Secretary), Evelyn, and Dean Sol Mawis.
However, allow me to devote a greater part of what I will share with you
tonight by way of a continuation of my conversation with the 11 awardees. Good
evening, all of you. It was my privilege a few weeks ago to have gotten to know all 11
of you in the brief time we spent conversing in one of the Court’s rooms. As Chief
Justice Panganiban told you, not many people have been able to enter those rooms.
So a lot of lawyers would give a lot to have been able to enter the places that you
were allowed to enter in the Court just so that you could have our conversation take
place. Now, when we, the jurors went through your essays, don’t ever think that we
were looking at the grammar, the style of writing, whether you would make the
grade in the literature class. What we were trying to look for was your heart, really.
And I found that for tonight at least, I want to continue this conversation by telling
you that I found that there were two threads common in your narratives and
expositions on the concept of liberty and prosperity under the rule of law in your
essays. And namely, these are the significant role of lawyers in this endeavor to
promote both liberty and prosperity under the rule of law, and the continuing need
for public discourse and debate in policy-making and that this should not just be left
to the politicians alone.
For Tess Marie Tan—she is not here with us today, she is trying to do our
country proud by competing in Beijing—a junior at the University of San Carlos Law
School, she said that “the right to life, liberty, and prosperity are so closely
intertwined that the impairment of one necessarily impacts the exercise and
4
employment of the other.” In an imaginary letter “to the random law students
studying in the corner,” she offers the following advice “to remind you why we are
here: to humanize the law, to be vanguards of the Constitution, to do what we do
because if not us, then who?
Let me tell you that I missed her physical presence then as we continue to
miss her physical presence. I was really actually encouraging all 11 of you to bond
together as brothers and sisters in a common cause. But I enjoyed the thought that
technology has allowed us to breach that physical divide where I had to express my
admiration for Tess Marie when she was able to follow our conversations through
Skype despite the fact that the telco (telecommunications company) connection is
not necessarily that reliable. This is a message to somebody here from one of the
telcos. (laughter)
I actually enjoyed that, and when I was seeing how she was much she was
straining her head just to make sure that she could capture the entire conversation;
it spoke to me of the endless possibilities of continuing this kind of discourse with
thoughtful young people like you. And it refreshed my spirit.
Kaycelle Anne Castillo, who took up accounting before studying law at FEU
(Far Eastern University) in Makati, opines that all efforts to secure liberty and
prosperity by government policymakers will “be in vain if there is no good justice
system to promote the rule of law.” Thus her personal vision “is to help more people
attain [the] autonomy of living a victorious and prosperous life under the rule of
law” by becoming a lawyer serving as a barrier against injustice.
Rexlyn Anne Evora of the Polytechnic University of the Philippines, who also
has Anne as her second name, echoes her namesake’s opinion of the significant role
5
that lawyers play in safeguarding liberty and nurturing prosperity under the rule of
law. She writes that lawyers must be the “grindstone,” by which the people keep
their rights bright and sharp. And I remember that it was with this same kind of
spirit that she was actually challenging my assumption that it would be difficult to
educate the greater masses of our people of the importance of due process of law. So
my challenge to her was, “Show me how.” And I remember this challenge. And while
it is a challenge to her, it is also a challenge to me to be able to be a Chief Justice who
can communicate with her people at the gut level on why due process and the rule
of law are important.
San Beda College of Law Alabang’s Violeta Najarro, Jr.—I called her Junior
then—declares that she “is not just a student of law.” She says, “Above all, I am a
citizen freely exercising this liberty that was granted to us by law and the prosperity
that comes with it, and I know that I have the duty to protect it in any way I can.”
Sean James Borja of Ateneo de Manila University School of Law, who has
already hurled many challenges to his batchmates and has pleaded with us to
continue trusting in them and believing in the brightness of the future that awaits
them, believes that lawyers are the agents and advocates that bridge the gap
between the goals of liberty and prosperity and their beneficiaries. Thus, the
lawyers “must learn the power of advocacy and become the voice that resonates
when others go silent.”
Ervin Frederick Dy, a student at the UP College of Law, has already committed
himself to government service, plotting a career path from the Office of the Solicitor
General to either the Court of Appeals or to the Sandiganbayan, where he can help
promote the philosophy of liberty and prosperity by helping attain judicial stability.
He was too modest to say that there was one more step that he wanted. (laughter)
6
Vanessa Vergara of the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law, for her
part, believes that for law to be a guarantee of liberty and prosperity, it must
address the actual realities that people live in and that those in the legal profession
can help in this regard in three ways: first, by the upholding of the importance of
dialogue; second, in lawyers’ capacity to represent other people’s points of view;
and third, in lawyers’ role of supporting the everyday lives of people.
FEU Makati’s Kevin Ken Ganchero is of the same mind, seeking to promote the
rule of law through an informed and civilized public discourse by an educated
citizenry that is aware of their rights and responsibilities. In his future law career,
he plans to teach and volunteer as a lecturer in legal education for non-lawyers.
Another accountant, Dion Ceazar Pascua of the San Beda College of Law,
opines that liberty and prosperity can be attained if properly made and forward
thinking laws are diligently followed by its citizens. Dion calls for greater public
participation in upholding the rule of law, exhorting that “we must never forget our
roles as citizens of the Republic.”
Jose Noel Hilario of the UST (University of Sto. Tomas) Faculty of Civil Law
wrote that law schools are the key institution to propagate the philosophy of liberty
and prosperity under the rule of law by honing future lawyers to take that
philosophy into consideration in every area of their work as lawyers.
His fellow junior at UST Law, Ma. Janine Padernal, points out that prosperity
makes sense only if there is respect for human rights. Janine also said that law
students should include the needs of others in their own goals; and that when they
become lawyers, they must “not only dwell on the legal aspect but also on the
political, social, economic, cultural, and psychological aspects in their work.”
7
As you can see, Chief Justice Panganiban, that is why I did not need to prepare
a speech, I just had to read excerpts of their excellent essays. And I could see that
basically, the 11 and I and the Chief [Justice] and so many of the law deans here are
of one mind. In fact, I had a sneaking suspicion that Ombudsman [Conchita] “Chit”
[Carpio] Morales actually got their essays, and that became the basis for her very
famous speech now.
I am actually deeply encouraged to hear those words from a very
thoughtful, mature, and wise set of young people. We must not forget that they
are part of the country’s youth who, in [Jose] Rizal’s own words, are the hope
of our country and its future as well. This night belongs to them; I think this
audience will all agree.
But allow me now to try to continue that conversation along the gut
level that I try to start with you. Remember how you thought I was asking
quite very aggressive and hostile questions by asking you why you continue to
study law if you cannot prove that there are people who still believe in law?
Tinanong ko kayo noon, “Bakit pa kayo mag-aabogado kung hindi naman pala
importante na ang batas?” (Why are you going to take up law if the law is not
important anymore?) And remember that, somehow, some of you were
challenged by the thought that I had provoked then because I followed it up
with the question, “Do you think, in fact, that people are already tired of
hearing about due process and they would rather go for expediencies and
shortcuts?” But some of you told me, “No, Ma’am.” We think that, first, Noel
tried to tell me that it goes all the way to the very foundation of the formation
8
of values which is all the way from childhood education. And immediately, I
was reminded of Chief Justice Panganiban’s project which is to integrate
values education with a component that will try to promote the rule of law
even at an early age, and that was the challenge to me.
Am I as Chief Justice thinking about the future of our country where I
am looking at my role as possibly helping, together with my fellow lawyers in
this country, the rearing of our youth to be law-abiding citizens but lovers also
of the rule of law, due process, and fair play? So, I encourage everyone to look
at this possibility that here you are talking to people, who according to Sean,
represent the so-called “temperamental brats,” but I don’t think that they are
temperamental in any way nor are they brats. I believe that, rather, the
challenge that they are posing to us is of those of the older generation,
whether we have dug the roots deep enough so that the fountain of justice will
really flow into the very soil that nurtures our country’s soul. And then I
reflected deeply, and I thought that actually there seems to be a disconnect.
Are we lawyers just talking to ourselves and to law students who
themselves want to be of our kind? And have we forgotten to talk with our
people? That’s why Kaycelle was telling me it is how we explain it, and she
was just so impassioned with explaining law to non-lawyers that she would be
willing to devote a great part of her life to continue doing that, together with
somebody else.
Ombudsman Morales talks about post-truth and I asked you, actually,
questions that sought your opinions on whether we can still find truth in
9
today’s violent and heated discourses, and you said you have not given up.
And the fact that you were saying that you have not given up, despite the
difficulty of trying to communicate plain and simple truths looking at constant
values in our country, meant a great deal to me. That means that I, myself,
cannot give up. In other words, from the pedestal of where the Supreme Court
has always been, which is a bit removed from the people, shrouded in
mystery, there is, perhaps, a new age that must dawn.
Now, for our people and I ask that, in fact, this be the beginning of a
genuine conversation between our people and the younger generations, those
who not only aspire to be lawyers, but all those who just aspire to have a just
and fair society. Can we really talk to them at the gut level?
Sisimulan ko po, halimbawa po sa Korte Suprema, nag-iisip po kami na
pa-iigtingin ang tinatawag nating “access to justice.” Sinisimulan po natin ito
ng paggagawa ng mga courts na magtatanggap ng mga reklamo na mga
maliliit na bagay ukol sa paniningil sa isang dispute na hindi lumalampas sa
halagang dalawang-daang libo. Paano po ba nangyari ang isipan at ang
patuloy na pag-inog ng gulong ng hustisya upang bigyan ng tinatawag na
“access to justice” itong mga small claims na ito? (I’ll start, for example in the
Supreme Court, we are thinking of intensifying what we call “access to justice.”
We start this by creating courts that will ask and receive minor complaints
regarding a dispute which will not exceed the amount of ₱200,000. How did
we come up with this thought and the continuous turning of the wheels of
justice in order to give the so-called “access to justice” for these small claims?)
10
Simple po ito. Marami ho sa atin siguro may mga kasambahay sa buhay.
Siguro po kayo, ginagawa ninyo pong generous ang inyong compensation
package sa kanila; tinutulungan ninyo sila sa lahat ng makakaya ninyo. Ngunit
sila, dahil po sila ay may trabahong nagkakaroon po sila ng sweldong
maaasahan ay inuutangan mismo ng kanilang mga kamag-anak—nag-
uutangan, nag-uutangan sa barangay, sa mga kamag-anak at hindi na ho
nagkakabayaran. Ganon din po ang mga OFWs (Overseas Filipino Workers),
dahil sila po ang nakikita na “cash source” ng karamihang mga barangay, at ng
mga pamilya, at mga kaanak, napipilitan po silang magpaluwal ng pera ngunit
sa panahon na sila po ang nagigipit, hindi na po sila makasingil. (This is
simple. Many of us, perhaps, have domestic help. Perhaps, you are generous
with their compensation package; you are helping them in the best way that
you can. However, since they have jobs and a reliable amount of money, their
relatives would loan money from them—they loan from each other, they loan
from the village, and they are not able to pay the debts. The situation is the
same with the OFWs because they are deemed as the “cash source” in a
number of villages, and their families, and their relatives, they are forced to
shell out money, but when they are in need of money, they are not able to
charge them for debts.)
Hindi po ba nagkakaroon ng injustice sa malawakan at malalimang
paraan? Hindi po ba unjust na sila na nga ang nag-fi-finance sa kapwa nilang
maralita, sila rin po ang mahihirapan sa pagkuha ng hustisya kung sakaling
‘yung mga pina-utang nila ay magkaroon na ng kakayahang magbayad. Hindi
11
po ba ang hustisya ay dapat magsimula sa ating bahay mismo, sa pagtrato
natin sa ating kapwa, sa ating kapitbahay? Hindi po ba dapat tayo mismo na
mayroong isang seguridad sa hanapbuhay ay dapat maghanap po ng paraan
upang pagaanin ang ganitong kailangan nilang “access to justice?” Kaya’t
sinasabi ko po, ang hustisya po ba ay hindi ganitong kapayak? Kailangan po ba
nating pahirapan sila at sabihin na kailangan po kayo dumaan sa isang trial na
napakahirap? Maghihintay po kayo ng summons, maghihintay po kayo ng
ganito, at kailangan mayroon po kayong mga abogado? (Isn’t there injustice in
a broad and profound way? Isn’t it unjust that they are the ones financing
their underprivileged fellowmen, they are also the ones who will have a hard
time getting justice if ever their debtors would finally have the capability of
paying. Shouldn’t justice start at our homes, how we treat our fellow men, our
neighbors? Shouldn’t we, who are secured in our jobs, find a way in order for
them to easily get access to justice? That’s why I am asking, isn’t justice this
simple? Do we need to give them a hard time and tell them they need to
undergo a very hard trial? You will wait for summons, you will wait for this,
and you will need lawyers.)
Halimbawa po ‘yung sinabi sa akin ni Kaycelle, “Bakit hindi natin sabihin
na ang mamamayan mismo ay pwedeng magdulog sa korte ng kanilang
reklamo?” Paano sila lalapit kung hindi nila alam paano ipresenta ang kanilang
hinaing sa korte? ‘Di dapat ang korte maghahanap ng paraan para tulungan
silang gumawa ng kanilang testimonya. Pababalik-balikin po ba sila upang sila
ay ma-cross-examine, eh bawa’t isang araw po na naka-day off sila
12
magugutom na ang pamilya nila? Bakit hindi natin tulungan sila gumawa ng
affidavit at ‘yung kabilang panig rin ay turuan rin nating gumawa ng affidavit?
At sa pamamagitan ng isang huwes na husto ang pagka-train, titignan niya ang
mga affidavits na ‘yon at maaaring magtanong siya ng kaunti. Ngunit sapat na
dapat ang mga dokumentong ‘yon upang siya ay maghusga ng tinatawag
nating small claims. (An example is what Kaycelle asked me: “Why don’t we
tell them that the citizens themselves are allowed to file their complaints in
the court?” How will they come if they don’t know how to present their
complaints in court? The court should find a way to help the citizens write
affidavits of their own testimonies. Will they be asked to go back and forth for
cross-examination, for each time they get a day off, their families will starve?
Why don’t we help them make their affidavits and why not teach the other
side as well? And by way of a judge who is well-trained, he will check those
affidavits and he may ask a few questions. However, those documents should
already be sufficient in order for him to judge what we call small claims.)
Hindi ho kaya ang mga law students natin ay puwedeng lumabas sa mga
mamamayan natin at sabihing, “Kaya natin ang hustisya at tutulungan namin
kayong makakuha ng hustisya.” ‘Yung mga kamag-anak ninyong OFW,
dalawang linggo lamang naman po nandito sa Pilipinas, tulungan po natin
gumawa ng affidavit para pagdating nila sa Pilipinas, tapos na kaagad ang
kanilang problema. Hindi po ba puwede tayong bumaba kung saan tayo ngayon
nalulukluk upang pumunta sa mga tao sa gitna ng kanilang sitwasyon gaya ng
sinabi ni Vanessa ng Ateneo, dapat ang abogado kasama sa pang araw-araw na
13
realidad ng tao. Dapat nating balasahin muli ang ating pananaw ukol sa batas.
Ito ba ay napakahirap intindihin? Kailangan bang sabihin na ang
pinakamatatalino lamang sa wikang Ingles ang puwedeng maging dalubhasa
dito? Ngunit kaya po ba natin palitan ang ating pananaw at sabihing ang batas
ay mananahan sa puso ng tao? (Is it possible for our law students to reach out
to our citizens and tell them, “We can have justice, and we will help you get
justice.” Your OFW relatives, who will only stay for two weeks in the
Philippines, let’s help them make their affidavits so that when they arrive in
the Philippines, their problems will be solved immediately. Can’t we leave our
assigned position for a while to reach out to people in the midst of their
current situation like what Vanessa of Ateneo has said that a lawyer should be
part of the daily reality of the people. We should re-evaluate the value of our
insights with regards to our law. Is this hard to understand? Do we need to say
that the most intelligent people in the English language are the only ones who
can be experts here? But can we change our views and say that the law dwells
in the hearts of people?)
Alam ng tao kung may katarungan, nararamdaman at nagliliyab ang
kanyang puso ‘pag nararamdaman niya na nagagawad ang hustisya nang patas
at mabilisan at nararamdaman rin po niya ang injustice ‘pag nakikita niya ang
patuloy na pag-aapi sa mga mararalita sa ating lipunan. Tama po kayo mga
kabataan, kayong 11. Sinabi ninyo nga po na talagang ang dapat bigyan ng
puwang sa ating puso ang mga pangangailangan ng ating mga kababayan.
Huwag lamang isipin ang layunin para sa sarili ngunit palawigin ang inyong
14
pananaw upang isama na rito ang pangagailangan ng mga maliliit sa ating
lipunan. Tama rin po kayo nang sinabi ninyo na hindi lamang po ang legal ang
tingnan ngunit ang sociological, cultural, historical at political na environment
natin ay dapat maintindihan ng bawa’t isang gustong manilbihan sa dambanan
ng batas. (People know if there is justice, they feel it and their hearts are
overjoyed whenever they feel that justice is being served fairly and just, and
they also feel injustice when they witness the continuous oppression of the
poor in our society. You, the youth, are right, the 11 of you. You said that what
we really need to have room in our hearts for are the needs of our fellow
Filipinos. Don’t only think of your own goals, but extend your vision in order
to include the needs of the minority in our society. You were also right when
you said that we should not only look at the legal aspect, but the sociological,
cultural, historical and political environment should also be understood by
everyone who wants to serve at the altar of law.)
Sa bandang huli, ang akin pong inaasahan ay itong labing-isa pong ito ay
magiging totoong katuwang ng hustisya, ng Korte Suprema, ng inyong mga
dekano, lalong-lalo na sa Philippine Association of Law Schools upang gawing
tunay na buhay ang hustisya sa ating bayan. Tayo pong isa sa bansang
napakadami pong mga kodigo, batas kodigo, na na-isulat na at pinag-uusapan.
Napaka-modern po ng iba nating mga batas. Totoong mayroong mga huli pa at
hindi pa moderno ngunit marami na po tayong mga modernong batas. Ngunit
hindi po ba isang pagbabalatkayo ang pag-iisip na tayo ay kayang magpatuloy
ng ganitong patakaran at kalakal habang ang kauhawan ng ating mga
15
kababayan sa tunay na hustisya na kanilang nararamdaman ay hindi natin
napapawi? Kaya po ba nating sabihin na mayroon talaga tayong ginawang
higit pa sa ating kakayahan upang abutin ang puso ng ating mga kababayan
upang sila ay maniwala ulit sa batas? Nagkausap-usap na po ba ang mga haligi
ng hustisya? Nag-usap usap na po ba tayong mga abogado tungkol sa estado ng
batas sa ating bayan? Tayo po ba ay patuloy na nananalig na batas, due
process, at fairness? Kailangang-kailangan ito upang tayo ay tuluyang maging
isang progresibong bayan. Hindi po puwedeng magkaroon ng economic
advancement kung walang katatagan sa larangan ng batas. Hindi
magkakaroon ng tunay na paglaganap ng kaluluwa ng ating mga kababayan
kung ang mga problema ng hustisya ay ating napapabayaan. (In the end, what
I expect from these 11 is for them to be true partners of justice, of the
Supreme Court, of your deans, especially in the Philippine Association of Law
Schools, to make justice real in our country. We are one of the countries that
have a lot of codes, law codes that were written and talked about. Some of our
laws are very modern. While it is true that there are some outdated laws that
are not yet modern, we already have many modern ones. But isn't it
hypocritical to think that we are able to continue this policy and practice
while the thirst of our people for true justice is not quenched? Can we truly
say that we have went beyond our ability in order to touch the hearts of our
fellow Filipinos so that they will believe again in the law? Have the pillars of
justice spoken to each other? Have we, lawyers, discussed about the state of
law in our country? Do we continue to believe in the law, due process, and
fairness? This is absolutely necessary for us to eventually become a
16
progressive nation. We cannot have economic advancement if there is no
stability in the field of law. There is no genuine fulfillment of the soul if the
problems concerning justice are left unresolved.
Kaya’t hinihimok ko po ang aking mga kaibigan, 11 FLP Scholars. Nawa’y
huwag na huwag kayong manghina sa inyong idealismo. Ano man ang
malaman ninyong katotohanan ukol sa kalakaran ng pag-abogasiya dito, hindi
dapat ito maging hadlang sa inyong panaginip ng magkaroon ng mas
malawakang paglaganap ng hustisya sa ating bayan. Nawa’y hindi po kayo
masilaw sa pangarap na magkaroon ng limpak-limpak na kayamanan ngunit
hanapin ninyo po ang tunay na kayamanan na ibibigay sa inyo ng busilak na
serbisyo sa ating bayan. Tignan ninyo po ang future with a long-term vision;
isipin ninyo po hindi lamang ang inyong henerasyon ngunit ang mga
henerasyon pang susunod. (That’s why I urge my friends, 11 FLP Scholars. May
you never be discouraged in your idealism. Whatever truth you may know
about the trend of law here, this shouldn’t be a hindrance to your dream of
having a widespread justice in our country. May you not be dazzled by the
dream to have enormous wealth but find real treasure in providing sincere
service to our country. Look at the future with a long-term vision; think not
only of your own generation but the future generations as well.)
Kung mayroon po kaming kakapusan, kaming mga henerasyon na nauna,
punan ninyo po at patawarin ninyo kami. Nag-iibayo po kami ng aming
pangako sa inyo na pa-iigtingin namin ang serbisyo sa aming bayan. Kami po ay
nag-uusap-usap at hindi po kami titigil hangga’t hindi po namin mapatunayan
17
sa inyong henerasyon ng hangga’t mayroon po kaming lakas, hindi po kami
tumigil sa paglaban para sa hustisya at sa karapatan ng mga tao. Lahat po ng
ito ay babasbasan ng ating Panginoon basta’t ang ating puso ay nasa tamang
lugar lamang. (If we have shortcomings, the previous generations, please
compensate for them and forgive us. We are fulfilling our promise to you that
we will improve our service to our country. We have been conversing and we
won’t stop until we have proven to your generation that while we still have
strength, we haven’t stopped fighting for justice and human rights. All of these
will be blessed by our God as long as our hearts are in the right place.)
So, napakaganda po ng experience ko nang na-meet ko itong 11. Chief
Justice “Art,” thank you na na-imbita mo ako. Thank you to the Tan Yan Kee
Foundation. Patuloy ninyo pong ibahagi ang blessing na na-ibigay sa inyo, sa
ating mga kababayan na kailangang-kailangan ng tulong. Tayo po ay mga
mapapalad na tao sa kwartong ito, nakakakain tayo ng tatlong beses sa isang
araw, magaganda po lahat ng ating mga kasuotan, kaya po nating lahat mag-
Ingles, ngunit marami po sa ating mga kababayan wala po noon. Marami sa
kanila, kumakalam ang sikmura nila. Marami sa kanila, kung anu-anong
pinapasukan umangat lamang ang antas sa buhay makuha lamang ang pinaka-
basic na pangangailangan. Hindi po ba panahon na tayo po ay magbigay ng
apaw-apaw sa sarili natin at hindi lang po ‘yung ating kaapawan ngunit ang
ating pinakabubuod. (So, it was a beautiful experience to have met the 11.
Chief Justice “Art,” thank you for inviting me. Thank you to the Tan Yan Kee
Foundation. Please keep sharing the blessing that has been given to you, to
18
our fellow Filipinos who desperately need help. We are blessed people in this
room, we eat three times a day, we all wear beautiful clothing, we can all
speak in English, but many of our countrymen don’t have those. Many of them,
they are starving. Many of them engage in various activities or jobs just to
elevate their status in life in order for them to attain their basic needs. Isn’t it
time that we give them not only our excess but also devote the entirety of
ourselves to the task of making their lives better.)
Maraming, maraming salamat po, at Congratulations!