But there are serious legal obstacles to the American law. For one, it’s a clear case of interference in the functioning of aco-equal state.

I did not want to write about anything serious since it’s still the yuletide season. But unfortunately, Leila de Lima just would not vanish into the night. This time, her allies have succeeded in pushing legislation purportedly banning individuals who supported her incarceration.

Let me be very clear. Leila de Lima is in jail facing trial for the most serious drug charges. Witnesses, and there’s a battalion of them including her own appointee to the National Bureau of Investigation and her own lover, gave testimony that she accepted money from drug syndicates operating from within Muntinlupa. A most damning testimony came from now Baguio Mayor Benjie Magalong. According to him, it was his team that painstakingly investigated the drug cartel in Muntinlupa only to be excluded when the actual raids were conducted. It was really an instance of hulidap. Apprehend those not cooperating but spare those that paid up.

Like it or not, the judicial process must unfold. Like any accused, she has to deal with the perennial weakness of the Philippine judicial system, which is delay. She could have done something about it when she was Secretary of Justice. She did not and now, she faces the consequences for it.

While De Lima and her allies would like to believe that she is a victim of political persecution, the reality is just like any accused, she has to face the justice system. If she is in fact innocent, she will be acquitted. Otherwise, she will be convicted. As borne by the victims of the Maguindanao massacre, it’s a long and arduous process. But in the end, we can depend on our courts for a fair and impartial verdict.

The United States law itself is regrettable. It condemns the entire justice system as if it cannot function. The irony is we copied our Constitution primarily from the Americans. If there is Executive overreach, as the law seems to imply, then it’s the fault of the founding fathers of the United States. Perhaps, they should have adopted the English system where the highest judicial organ still forms part of parliament. Many say that ultimately, the public’s mandate is the ultimate visualizer. Hence, the rationale for why in the United States, even prosecutors are elected.

But there are serious legal obstacles to the American law. For one, it’s a clear case of interference in the functioning of a co-equal state. Maybe American legislators need to be reminded that we are no longer its colony. In fact, the Philippine war for independence from US rule proved to be among the bloodiest armed conflicts in the world. But such law is proof that no matter our status as an independent state, America still treats us as a subject to the extent that she now wants to dictate on our juridical processes.

This is not the first time that the US violated the cardinal principle of noninterference. In the case of Nicaragua vs United States, the International Court of Justice rued that the United States was responsible for the use of illegal force against the sovereignty of Nicaragua. How? Because according to the Court, it mined ports, committed overflights, resorted to political assassinations, even if it ruled that the US finding of the Contras, a revolutionary group that sought to overthrow a duly elected Sandinista regime, was not an armed attack. Still make no mistake, the Court’s ruling was that the United States violated the principle of noninterference.

I think it’s obvious that when the US now seeks to prevent those behind the jailing of De Lima from entering the United States, this is tantamount to interference. It is a message to the judge and prosecutors that should they persist in convicting De Lima, no matter what the evidence maybe, they would be barred entry into the country. Talk of bullying! Fortunately, I do not think Filipino judges will succumb to such bullying. For what it’s worth, Filipino judges and lawyers have been killed for discharge of their functions, But, no matter what, they continue to discharge their functions.

So, in the end, I do not think the US law will succeed in influencing our Courts. If at all, it just promoted tourism to Europe and other Asian destinations. So be it.