Convoluted legalese

Credit to Author: Tempo Desk| Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2019 16:30:21 +0000

 

ecf JOHNNY DAYANG echoes

IN recent weeks, the touchy is­sue of releasing inmates from penitentiaries under the GCTA (good conduct time allowance) law (RA 10592) has created a maelstrom. Overnight, agencies and individu­als involved in the chaos suddenly become legal experts and criticized each other’s arguments and posi­tions.

Tragically, many substantive ques­tions that have shrouded the inter­pretation of our laws have been left to rot on the wayside, creating an impression that the guardians of our legal system prefer the kleig lights of publicity instead of ironing out the kinks.

Sadder still, the congressional hearings called supposedly to get to the bottom of the problem and “in aid of legislation” have further muddled the chaotic scenario. The legislators competed with each other in trying to focus the limelight on themselves, at times unsure whether the details they have gathered in the public hearings will amount to something positive.

The complications in our laws, which only the Supreme Court has the authority to untangle and clearly interpret, do not simply lie in the haste with which our statutes have been crafted by Congress. In fact, the central issue why laws are difficult to fathom is the failure of the legislature to adopt easily un­derstandable statutory construction and language.

Given this complexity that merely obscures the true intent of a law, the preparation of their implementing rules and regulations (IRR) often results in further ambiguity. This is precisely the case of RA 10592, which the justice secretary described in the congressional hearing.

The convoluted legalese or lan­guage used in the construction of our laws does not allow ordinary civilians, even those with a train of non-legal degrees attached to their names, to easily un
http://tempo.com.ph/feed/