By Atty. Eduardo T. Reyes III
Appearing before a panel of three (3) magistrates in one of the divisions of the Sandiganbayan along Commonwealth Avenue, Quezon City, a defense counsel was pleading for his client’s liberty by invoking “merciful justice” when the presiding magistrate questioned him: “But what do you mean by merciful justice, counsel? Is it not a paradox or oxymoron?”
Indeed, curiously, what is merciful justice?
More than twenty centuries ago, Justinian defined justice “as the constant and perpetual wish to render every one of his due.” (Republic v. Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018 citing Alonzo v Intermediate Appellate Court)
In line with the same, by citing Alonzo v. Intermediate Appellate Court, the Supreme Court extrapolated that:
“But as has also been aptly observed, we test a law by its results: and likewise, we may add, by its purposes. It is a cardinal rule that, in seeking the meaning of the law, the first concern of the judge should be to discover in its provisions the intent of the lawmaker. Unquestionably, the law should never be interpreted in such a way as to cause injustice as this is never within the legislative intent. An indispensable part of that intent, in fact, for we presume the good motives of the legislature, is to render justice.
Thus, we interpret and apply the law not independently of but in consonance with justice. Law and justice are inseparable, and we must keep them so. To be sure, there are some laws that, while generally valid, may seem arbitrary when applied in a particular case because only of our nature and functions, to apply them just the same, in slavish obedience to their language. What we do instead is find a balance between the word and the will, that justice may be done even as the law is obeyed.
As judges, we are not automatons. We do not and must not unfeelingly apply the law as it worded, yielding like robots to the literal command without regard to its cause and consequence. “Courts are apt to err by sticking too closely to the words of law,” so we are warned, by Justice Holmes again, “where these words import a policy that goes beyond them.”
x x x x
More than twenty centuries ago, Justinian defined justice “as the constant and perpetual wish to render every one of his due.” That wish continues to motivate this Court when it assesses the facts and the law in every case brought to it for decisions. Justice is always an essential ingredient of its decisions. Thus when the facts warrant, we interpret the law in a way that will render justice, presuming that it was the intention of the lawmaker, to begin with, that the law be dispensed with justice.
Indeed, where the interpretation of a statute according to its exact and literal import would lead to mischievous results or contravene the clear purpose of the legislature, it should be construed according to its spirit and reason, disregarding as far as necessary the letter of the law. A statute may therefore, be extended to cases not within the literal meaning of its terms, so long as they come within its spirit or intent.”(citations omitted). Republic v. Manalo, G.R. No. 221029, April 24, 2018).
While everyone’s mantra seems to be to demand “justice”; what most actually mean is “I want to get what I believe is for me”.
But that is not the quintessence of justice- let alone merciful justice.
In Shakespeare’s “The Merchant of Venice”, merciful justice was handed down when the shrewd merchant Shylock sued his debtor to exact his “pound of flesh” as payment for the latter’s debt which was stipulated in their contract. Begging for mercy, the debtor asked that he be excused from his debt, but Shylock retorted: “What is mercy?” to which the “judge” then ruled that:
“The quality of mercy is not strained.
It droppeth as the gentle rain from heaven
Upon the place beneath. It is twice blest:
It blesseth him that gives and him that takes.
Tis mightiest in the mightiest; it becomes
The throned monarch better than his crown.
His scepter shows the force of temporal power
The attribute to awe and majesty
Wherein doth sit the dread and fear of kings
But mercy is above this sceptered sway;
It is enthroned in the hearts of kings;
It is an attribute to God himself;
And earthly power doth then show likest God’s
When mercy seasons justice.”
Metaphorically referenced as the “temple of justice”, courts have judges as their priests. “Our conception of good judges has been, and is, of men who have a mastery of the principles of law, who discharge their duties in accordance with law. Judges are the visible representations of law and justice, from whom the people draw the will and inclination to obey the law. (Philippine National Construction Corporation v. Hon. Jesus B. Mupas, Presiding Judge Branch 112, Regional Trial Court, Pasay City, A.M. No. RTJ-20-2593. November 10, 2020)
Merciful justice is when “mercy seasons justice”. Just like the gentle rain from heaven, mercy blesses both the giver and the taker. It is ethereal but never ephemeral as it touches lives in a special kind of way- and eternally.
Indeed, court decisions are akin to those welcome little raindrops from heaven when justice is tempered by mercy.
This is “merciful justice” according to that defense counsel who pleaded his client’s case before the Sandiganbayan.
(The author is the senior partner of ET Reyes III & Associates- a law firm based in Iloilo City. He is a litigation attorney, a law professor and a law book author. His website is etriiilaw.com).
