▁observed ▁by ▁Prim it ivo ▁M ij ares ▁in ▁the ▁Chapter ▁" Sp in eless ▁Jud ici ary : ▁Leg it im izing ▁A ▁P ret ender " ▁that , ▁while ▁the ▁Rat ification ▁C ases ▁was ▁resolved ▁in ▁a ▁matter ▁of ▁months , ▁the ▁other ▁cases ▁involving ▁Mar cos ’ ▁imprison ed ▁critics ▁were ▁not ▁decided ▁until ▁a ▁year ▁or ▁two ▁later . ▁In ▁fact , ▁some ▁of ▁the ▁critics ▁withdraw ▁their ▁pet itions , ▁mostly ▁for ▁writ ▁of ▁habe as ▁cor pus , ▁due ▁to ▁the ▁lack ▁of ▁confidence ▁that ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁would ▁grant ▁their ▁relief . ▁ ▁Mak al int al , ▁when ▁he ▁became ▁Chief ▁Justice , ▁also ▁took ▁a ▁similar ▁approach ▁of ▁Con ce pc ion ▁in ▁dec iding ▁the ▁case ▁of ▁the ▁H abe as ▁Cor pus ▁C ases ▁of ▁Ben ign o ▁Aqu ino , ▁Jr . ▁() ▁by ▁summar izing ▁the ▁diverse ▁votes ▁of ▁the ▁members ▁of ▁the ▁court . ▁He ▁explained ▁the ▁reason ▁why ▁there ▁was ▁no ▁colleg ial ▁opinion ▁by ▁the ▁Court , ▁among ▁others , ▁that ▁the ▁just ices ▁of ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court ▁are ▁conscious ▁of ▁" the ▁future ▁ver dict ▁of ▁history ". ▁ ▁At ▁the ▁time ▁of ▁Chief ▁Just ices ▁Castro ▁and ▁Fernando , ▁the ▁Supreme ▁Court , ▁using ▁the ▁‘ leg it im izing ’ ▁power , ▁aff ir med ▁the ▁leg ality ▁of ▁the ▁Rat ification ▁C ases ▁through ▁several ▁cases , ▁such ▁as ▁San idad ▁v . ▁CO ME LE C ▁( 1 9 7 6