As a rule, courts routinely refuse to take jurisdiction over internal conflicts of not-for-profit organizations like the PIDCI. And for good reason. The conflicts are best resolved within the organization.

In the case of the PIDCI, this is the first time in its 14 years in existence that a lawsuit has been brought against it because of alleged circumvention of admission of new members to favor a certain slate of candidates for the PIDCI board.

After temporarily restraining the proclamation of winning candidates, a New York court rescinded nunc pro tunc (legalese for “acts that are allowed to be done after the time they should have been done with a retroactive effect)” her earlier injunction.

Justice Jane S. Solomon made the motion herself “since nobody came to seek an order” from the court, pointing out that the only way to get orders in the court is by making a motion.

Apparently, we have not heard the last of this dispute. The complainants plan to appeal the judge’s decision, which she wrote in her own handwriting at a preliminary conference on Monday. The judge probably anticipated this action as she remarked at the conclusion of the conference, “I’ll see you again, but hopefully when everybody is smiling together.”

Like everyone else who wants to see the community united for a common cause — such as a successful annual Philippine parade — we want an early closure to this unfortunate incident. As we said, it should not have come to this had there been full and unadulterated transparency in the entire electoral process.

After all, this is just a one-time happening, and no one is getting paid to do what in reality is a voluntary work. Probably some persons bask in the glow of a 15-minute fame. That’s all right with us. But to have a virtual dogfight to win an election for unsalaried positions make one pause for the real motives of those who want to control the PIDCI.

It is an axiom in a democracy that the voters deserve the government that they deserve.