Wednesday, December 28, 2011

Does IBP speak with one voice?

I am surprised that today the IBP presented 2 full page ads presenting its position. Actually the first is the current official organization, through its Board of Governors, and the second is a group of former IBP National Presidents. Lets first present the first group position which can be read in a fullpage advertisement in the December 28, Phil Daily Inquirer A6.

The Integrated Bar of the Philippines claimed that

1. the complainants (majority of the members of the Lower House of Representatives),signed the 57 -page complaint without reading and appreciating its ocntents and supporting documents, thereby violating the Constitution itself.
2. In instantly signing and elevating the complaint for Senate trial withou reading its contents and subjecting it to any discussion, the complainants violated due process and their own dutiy to make a determination of its sufficieny in form and substance and the existence of probable cause.
The IBP claimed that preliminary determination cannot be satisfied without actual reading and appreciation, if not discussion, of the complaint and supporting documents.
3. The impeachment complaint also failed to comply with the prescribed process in verifying its due execution. The complaint does not bear the certificate of acknowledgment by the House Sec-Gen as proof of his faithful compliance with the verification process.

The IBP claims that there are far more telling and serious defects in the substance of the impeachment complaint.
  1. The grounds invoked in the impeachment complaint subvert the constitutional guarantees of separation of powers and judicial independence, the first principles of the Rule of Law.
  2. The impeachment complaint also trifles with and violates the constitutional guarantee of protection of the law and due process, the first principles in our Bill of Rights.
In summary, for the guidance of the public , the IBP, through its Board of Governors, stands firm on its position that the impeachment omplaint run afoul witht eh Constitution in form and substance. The second group, still allied with the IBP, presented a manifesto, which they published in the Phil. Daily Inquirer, in page B2 of the same newspaper issue of December 28, 2011. In this manifesto, a group former IBP national presidents expressed their collective sense that the forthcoming impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona will be healthy for democracy! Here are some points from the manifesto:
  1. Not one in public service is a sacred cow.
  2. 2. We should recognize the primacy of the rule of law and respect the doctrine of separation of powers. This does not mean nor require that the Chief Justice be immune from criticism or impeachment.
  3. As Chief Justice, C Corona should be the first to strengthen te Supreme Court as an institution. The CJ abandons judicial statesmanship and independence when by official actions, he shows marked subservience to the person who appointed him Chief Justice. The SC will be a credible court of last resot only if it is a court of moral force.
  4. The President, as leader and father of the nation may and should speak in the strongest terms possible whenever the decisions of the Court of the actual official actuations of the Chief Justice no longer serve the best interest of the nation. After all, the welfare of the people is the highest law.
    Neither the House of Representatives be faulted. By impeaching Chief Justice Corona, it exercised its constitutional prerogative to initiate impeachment and and place the country on notice that the elected representative of the people are holding the Chief Justice accountable for his actions as specified in the Articles of Impeachment even as the poer to determine guild or innocence devloves upont the Senate.

The manifesto ends with the hope that

Let us come out of this experience as a stronger and better nation.

The manifesto was signed by the previous five national presidents of the IBP:

Raoul R. Agangco (1995-1997), Jose Aguil Grapilon (1997-1999), Arthur D. Lim (1999-2001), Teofilo Pilando (2001-2003), and Jose Anselmo I. Cadiz (2003-2006). The name of the current IBP national president Roan I. Libarios does not appear in the manifesto.

Based on my readings of these seemingly contradictory positions under the auspices of the IBP, the first advertisement delved too much on technicalities, which the Supreme Court in their rulings can either cite or ignore! . We are partial to the contents of the manifesto of former national presidents of the IBP.

Monday, December 26, 2011

Is Corona a politician or jurist? the unsigned 79 page reply.

We are wondering what to make of the 79 page reply to the Lower House of Congress charge of impeachement. Here are my first impressions: GMA swearing-in his formeer chief of staff and executive secretary.

The Honorable SC Chief Justice Corona, who has shown so much energy to protect His former patron, GMA or the President of the Republic of the Philippines, and to offer breathtaking legalized condonement of graft and corruption of former officials of the last administration for the lame reason of Executive Privilege!.

But the CJ is fighting back, firstly by hurling accusations back to the current President P-Noy, claiming that everything about the impeachment case was planned by the President, forgetting his own past actions of partiality to GMA. Of course He denied all charges in the impeachment complaint and moved for the impeachement trial to be dropped or dismissed.

The Chief Justice mistake was that people would be quiet about how the Supreme Court works, but He will get the shock of his life.

This only shows that the honorable Chief Justice is a studious politician in disguise and deserves to step down. Do it now, CJ Corona, do it for the good of the country, do it now as that other neer do well Ombudsman Gutierrez who has seen the evils of her ways!

We would like to have a copy of the Honorable Chief Justice Corona 79 page reply!

And what is unusual and shows how unprofessional the Honorable Chief Justice is, the reply does not look official at all. For He did not affix his signature! What does this mean? It can be declared defective!

to be continued,... your comments are welcome!

More reading:
GMAnetwork: Look who is talking

For the contents of the (75+ pages) reply , click on Jun Pasaylo: Corona answer to impeachment complaints.

House: CJ reply weak!

Corona asks Senate to dismiss impeachment complaint

Monday, December 19, 2011

Will Sec. Robredo teach the LGU executives how Bicol region prepares for Weather disturbances?

In the news Mayor: CDO not warned about Sendong

Most typhoons from the warm pacific land first in the Bicol region. Yet we seldom hear of great loss of lives from this region when typhoons pass over. Maybe the high frequency of typhoons have made them well prepared and aware of the destruction.

The government executives of the Bicol region do not rely on the official weather pronouncements of the PAGASA (Philippine Atmospheric and Geophysical and Astronomical Services Administration.! Instead they rely on the accessible Internet to obtain the most recent weather data. This is not a damnation of the PAGASA which does not enjoy the required support from the governement, but the local governmetn executives are just being practical!

Secretary Robredo should have his department hold educational seminars for LGU executives for he was once a mayor of a Bicol city.

Another region which do not depend much on the PAGASA is the Batanes region. Their houses with thick walls and small windows and climate awareness have virtually made the region virtually TYPHOON PROOF!

Our main blog has an automatically generated weather page: Please visit Weather Page. It includes satellite views of the Western Pacific, in the visible and IR region, typhoon warnings, predicted weather disturbance tracks and isobaric maps from the JTWC (Joint Typhoon Warning Center); Hongkong Observatory, HKO; Japan Meteorological Agency (JMA) and various National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA.

Sunday, December 18, 2011

Let us learn from tropical storm Sendong!

I openly suggest to Pres. Aquino to authorize a study be made with recommendations to prevent future tragedies as what happened to Cagayan de Oro city.

The report, to be under the auspices of DOST and relevant public offices, shall be made public one month after the study authorization is announced. It should include the tracking of the storm, the state of preparedness of cities and specific suggestions on the prevention or amelioration of the damaging effects of a storm like Sendong.

An update, an FB friend EJ commented:

The tragedy of Sendong and all the other storms, minor or major ones that hit the country are beyond our control but the effects and impacts of these storms could have been prevented if only, we as a nation have stricter implementation of our environmental laws. Our laws on mining and quarrying most especially needs review and this is a challenge for the presidency of PNoy.


Saturday, December 17, 2011

Senator Miriam Defensor's views on the incoming impeachment trial.

All statements are from
published on December 13, 2011.

We just reformat with some headings to make it more "palatable" and to summarize the intended points.

  1. The House move to transmit the impeachment case to the Senate was proper, despite the speed of how it was done. We have an impeachment case!

    Each House is the master of its own rules and procedures. The House or Representatives is not under the Senate. The House has to devise its own rules. This is consonant with the rulings of the Supreme Court. As long as those pre-arranged rules of procedures are followed — just because some people think it was done in too much of a hurry — it will not necessarily affect the validity of their proceedings. Apparently, these rules were followed, and so the transmittal to the Senate is proper.

  2. The Senate is prepared for the impeachment trial, re the Ombodsman case

    In the case of the Senate, I believe we are already prepared for the impeachment trial because we have hit the books already, a few months ago when there was a proposal to conduct an impeachment trial against former Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez. So we already had our caucuses and closed-door sessions to talk about the procedures to be followed. Once these procedures are agreed upon, they will bind all the members of the Senate. I have only two concerns.
  3. Difficult to separate politics from the impeachment trial
    The first concern is this: I don’t really know how we can keep a proceeding in both natures: the nature of a political proceeding, and the nature of a criminal proceeding. It is very difficult to decide on legal bases a political question. Inevitably, every senator will have his own political biases, and it will take a very high degree of strength of character to rise above the personal political biases and adhere instead to the rules approximating the Rules of Court, which we already have. So that is for every senator to decide on his own conscience.

  4. On the lack of trial experience for senators who are not lawyers
  5. My second concern is this: many of the members of the Senate are not lawyers, or if they are lawyers they have not had any trial experience and had no professional experience with the Rules of Court. So basically, many of them will be depending on their legal consultants.
  6. Texting or consulting constituents during the impeachment trial look improper, it should be banned.

    My fear is, if these senators do not study in depth the legal problems involved, or just find it too incomprehensible, it will be their legal assistants who will, in effect, decide the case. There is nothing we can do about it, but I hope that, at least during the caucuses, we will adopt a rule that will prohibit the senators from receiving text messages or other types of messages during the trial. You don’t want to see a trial judge in any regular trial court in the country consulting his text messenger or any device to see what is the advice of his consultant. I noticed in the last impeachment proceedings that this was done by certain senators. I thought that it was very unseemly that they should receive guidelines from their consultants even on questions to propose to the witnesses or the litigants involved. So, I hope that does not happen.

    Those are my two concerns: 1) how to keep objective and even-handed in a considerably not strictly judicial and not strictly political but quasi-judicial and quasi-political at the same time; and 2) the non-lawyers or non-practicing lawyers might repose too much confidence in their own legal consultants. Otherwise, I think the Senate is already prepared. Chief Justice Corona will start just like any litigant with a presumption of innocence and — as in any criminal case — the burden of proof is in the prosecution, meaning to say the House of Representatives acting as the prosecution or the fiscal. One other concern of mine in the impeachment trial, and possibly the most important of my concerns is this: we know that there are different levels of evidence or proof required to certain cases. In a civil case, for example, the level of proof is substantial evidence. In a criminal case, the level of proof required is proof beyond reasonable doubt. That is why it is very difficult to convict in a criminal case. Now what will be the level of proof in an impeachment trial? Will it be substantial evidence? Proof beyond reasonable doubt? Clear and convincing evidence? Satisfactory evidence? There are so many kinds of evidence involved. In other countries, sometimes the senators or whoever performs the role of judges cannot agree with just one level of proof and therefore would just throw it back to the senators or judges to decide on its own way what level of proof will be. One senator might apply the level of proof of substantial evidence and therefore convict or redeem on small evidence or insignificant amount of evidence. One senator may apply another standard — the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt — and therefore acquit because it is very hard to prove. Remember that in a criminal case, even one or just one-half of a reasonable doubt is already sufficient to acquit them. So the chief justice standing trial will be limited to all the rights that are extended to other citizens in his place. What is your advice to the non-lawyers in the Senate? Oo, sana mag-aral naman. Sana naman intindihin kung ano ang proseso ng impeachment. Hindi iyong pakursunada: kursunada ko ito kaya i-acquit ko o I will vote the person guilty. Merong mga nuances diyan.

  7. There are many technicalities involved!, The Rules of Court should be followed!

    There are so many technicalities involved in an impeachment case. For example in the opening of the second envelope, I was demonized because I voted against it pursuant to the Rules of Court. Noong buksan nila, wala naman palang laman na incriminating against the accused. So you see the strength of public opinion might sometimes be misled simply because of ignorance. I hope that this will not happen in this case.

President Noy should give immediate comfort by his presence in CDO.

President Noynoy should visit the flood ravaged city of Cagayan de Oro soonest and not after the Christmast December 25 day.

Head of states who are on state visits, usually go home soon after calamities or unusual disturbances affect their hone nations.

People warm up to a leader who shows genuine concern and affection to his constituents in their hour of deepest need. It is good that the secretary of national defense will visit today Sunday to oversee assistance operations.

President Noy should also issue a strong stand on illegal logging.

The national and local governments should offer FREE burials to the victims of this recent disaster.

The original news of Pres. Noy making a late visit to CDO generate a lot of negative backlash in the Facebooking World.

Friday, December 16, 2011

NANGGIGIGIL? or A clueless Chief Justice?

A clueless Chief Justice?

Chosen by some people as best quote in the speech of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court:

"Hindi ko po maintindihan kung bakit NANGGIGIGIL ng husto sa akin ang mahal nating pangulo, magmula pa po sa kanyang pagkaluklok sa pwesto"

Oh really? After ruling the truth commission to be unconstitutional, our beloved honorable CJ does not get it! Now, the SC has virtually stopped the government in its tracks to prosecute grafters and corrupters in the GMA administration. In other words, it has legalized the massive graft and corruption in the GMA period.

As one wag says, Chief Injustice?

Thursday, December 15, 2011

The President, SC, Legislature needs a crash course in Ethics!

This first appeared as my FB status!

The people who needs a crash course on Ethics, from time to time, badly are the President, Chief Justice and the Senators and Congressmen. This brouhaha should not have started if Madame GMA did not appoint a man RC who was

Chief of Staff
Executive Secretary

as her choice for Supreme Court Chief Justice. It is obvious that there is conflict of interest at the start unless you are so blind.

What is sad is that the Chief Justice built an image of the SC as a protection racket for the grafters and corrupters in the GMA administration in cahoots with the Ombudsman under MG, a very familiar person to the First Family.

Now the SC is under much closer scrutiny and should be more cicumspect and avoid senselessly charging with libel people who dare explore its hidden chambers.(Shadow of doubt: Probing the Supreme Court).

Merry Christmas everyone, lets party and lets us BEHAVE. Who needs a course in Ethics??! everyone.

Reflections ...

I asked a number of lawyers who frequent our courts, how they view the impeachment of the Chief Justice, and the result of my survey is hardly surprising. Four in one say they abhor the indecent haste in which the indictment to impeach the Chief Magistrate of the land was reached by the House of Representatives.

The President of the local Integrated Bar, has expressed his dismay saying it undermines the independence of the Judiciary, the last bastion of democracy.

In the welter of emotional voices speaking discordantly on this issue, lawyers take an entirely different tack. This is expected because like priests, they stick to the sacraments of legalism, which they alone have the exclusive privilege to speak, and to offer in the altar of justice, presided by the judges who are of their own kind. It is no wonder they are called Members of the Bar, for there is a bar that exclusively separates them from the layman. Lawyers intercede for the cause of their principals, like priests intercede for the faithful. The judge is the high priest who finally decides the conflicting claims following the rigid legalistic liturgies. It stands to reason that judges would suffer pain from the lash of unjust criticism, more so when made by one who is not a member of the bar. Of course criticizing judges is a favorite pastime of the lawyers, but at least they do it in private, (certainly not in front of the judge) akin to an acolyte gossiping about the bishop.

For a lawyer to be a Judge is a different thing. Whereas, as an advocate he could argue pound for pound, fight back, or be on the offensive, as a judge he must remain silent, cold, even passive and detached as demanded by well entrenched tradition and judicial propriety.

Judges are not supposed to defend their own decisions, in the bar of public opinion, and engage in editorializing their views. This makes them vulnerable. But judges are not beyond criticism, in the light of free speech. As I look at the past temperament of the High Court, there were instances when it has disciplined journalists, lawyers and litigants for their undignified, scathing commentaries and criticism viewed as an affront to the dignity of the court.

Somehow this extremely conservative tradition and punitive intolerance of the magistrates seemed to project the image that they are little gods with the power to strike down those who criticize their conduct or their decisions.

The point is, freedom of expression is not absolute and while the court or the magistrate is not beyond criticism, it expects a great modicum of courtesy and moderation.

This in a nutshell is the culture in our courts which need to be understood if one were to intelligently engage in the current public debate.

The Justice who got away.

I only knew, today, an honorable Justice of the Supreme Court involved in the plagiarism case, a case where the SC court embarassed itself by issuing a contempt of court to the U.P. Law faculty has actually a pending impeachment case in Congress.

According to the news, the Congress committee handling the case is running out of time and may be forced to drop the case.

Practical considerations may justify this development, but we also ask the Honorable Congressmen to expedite any work, not only in legislative work, but also in impeachment cases, which Congress must initiate as enshrined in the Constitution.

We need to know quickly the truth of the matter, a cloud of doubt is enveloping on the Justice concerned. A stigma has been attached, which can only be removed if the said Justice is declared innocent of this silly but serious crime of plagiarism.

We want our august members of the Supreme Court to be beyond reproach and as a first measure restore the credibility and honor of any Justice put under a cloud of impropriety.

We suggest that this be tackled after CJ Corona case.

Futher reading:

1. House abandons Justice case

2. GMANetwork: SC clears fellow Justice in plagiarism case

The Supreme Court has absolved a member of the bench who was accused of plagiarizing portions of a controversial ruling on World War II comfort women, explaining that the attributions of the allegedly plagiarized material were merely “accidentally deleted" by a court researcher! Who the court researcher was, was not divulged. We should have a notarized oath that such silly mistake was done.

The ponente of the above decision was not divulged.

3. Wikipedia entry It is amazing that Wikipedia is publishing an article about persons of importance in its pages. This should be a further incentive for politicians, judges and even the President to be circumspect on their performance. The future generations will have the resources to know what happened!

Who would not get mad with GMA and her brand of corruption and patronage politics?

GMA now has a neck brace and is confined at Veterans Hospital. Yet even in advanced coutnries such as the USA, being aged but on death row will not save one from the execution!

Some blogger did a list of the "crimes" of GMA and we are thankful we are freed from extra work. We spread the list so everyone who reads it seriously will somehow appreciate the scope and breadth of legalized corruption during the gma administration.

Future work: reformat the list so the ammount involved with the total is shown.

1. NBN ZTE Scandal
2. Millions of bribe money to Congressmen and Governors (October 2007)
3. Cheating in 2004 Elections (Hello Garci)
4. Joc Joc Bolante Case (Fertilizer Scam, P728 Million)
5. Jose Pidal Bank Account (Unexplained Wealth, P200 Million)
6. Nani Perez Power Plant Deal ($2 Million)
7. Use of Road User’s Tax for Campaigning
8. Billion Peso Macapagal Boulevard (Overprice of P532 Million)
9. Juetengate? (Illegal Numbers game kickbacks)
10. Extra Judicial Killings
11. Arroyo Moneys in Germany (Exposed by Senator Cayetano)
12. General Garcia and Other Military Men
13. Billion Peso Poll Automation contract to(Mega Pacific) (P1.3 Billion)
14. Northrail Project($503 Million)
15. Maguindanao Results of 2007 Elections (Zubiri, Bedol)
16. NAIA-3
17. Venable Contract (Norberto Gonzales)
18. Swine Scam (Exposed by? Atty. Harry Roque
19. GLORIA Arroyo son hidden assets in united states
22.the C-5 road controversy — Senator Manuel Villar
23.P550-million worth of funds from the Overseas Workers’ Welfare
Administration (OWWA).
24 P780-million LWUA funds-Prospero Pichay
25 Bishop’s SUV-Gloria Birthday gift
26 Arroyo linked in P325M lotto intelligence fund
27 Arroyo got P200M in kickbacks from govt projects-Zaldy Ampatuan
28.P200.41 billion or $4.6 billion in Malampaya royalties from 2002 to
May this year.
30. 600, 000 metric tons of Rotten rice imported from India.Kishore
Hemlani, an Indian trader allegedly close to Arroyo, reportedly bagged
the P9.5 billion contract for the rice importation.
31.Dato Arroyo wife bought the condo unit for $570, 000,
70-square-meter one-bedroom, one-bathroom unit (Unit No. 533) at the
luxury high-rise, full-service Gramercy Towers located at 1177
California St. in upscale downtown San Francisco.
31.- P50-million bribe to FG for the president’s veto of two franchise bills
70-square-meter one-bedroom, one-bathroom unit (Unit No. 533) at the
luxury high-rise, full-service Gramercy Towers located at 1177
California St. in upscale downtown San Francisco.
31.- P50-million bribe to FG for the president’s veto of two franchise bills
32.The additional funding led to a 41-percent spike in advertising
expenses, from P76.129 million in 2008 to P107.420 million in 2009,
which went mostly to ads for Arroyo’s achievements.
33.The report said the PIA received from the Department of Budget and
Management a notice of cash allocations amounting to P344.789 million,
even though only P222.488 million was appropriated for it under the
national budget.
34.- Denial of pork barrel funds to Malacanang’s political enemies
35.- Praises for Jovito Palparan, alleged mastermind of extra judicial
killings of militants
36.- Removal of govt bodyguards for former pres and Arroyo critic, Cory Aquino
37.- Appointment of manicurist as a member of the board of Pag-Ibig
38.- Appointment of gardener as deputy of the Luneta Park Administration.
39.- Midnight appointment of an Arroyo, RENATO CORONA, as SC Chief Justice
- 200+ other illegal midnight appointments


I am thankful to the friends of AH for posting the list in Facebook.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

If it is not Midas Marquez who ordered a judicial holiday, who did it then? The world wonders!

All is not well with out judicial branch, one of the three co-equal branches of government.

We all knew that court employees trooped to the Supreme Court in defence of and display of sympathy to the Honorable Chief Justice Renato Corona. Someone in the SC has issued some texts hinting of a court holiday (be in the office but do no work) and strangely no one is going forward to admit that such an order was given out (no one did it realy!).

The SC spokesman Midas Marquez denied on television that he issued a court holiday, but he cannot deny that he has sent text messages to higher local court officials. YOu cant charge him with perjury as he was telling the TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH.

So it is possible that in the confusion of the interpretation of the text messages, people of the courts system simply took the rest of the day off, not only to show solidarity for the embattled CJ but also took an opportunity as one can say to visit the malls.

The world should not wonder! Only and only in the Philippines. Who cares who ordered a judicial holiday?? :)

The practical effects of the Supreme Court decisions under the honorable Chief Justice Corona

  1. Their moral right to cite anyone in contempt of the SC has diminished. I am reminded of the U.P. Law School faculty case.

  2. People like bloggers are having a field day questioning the morals and ethics of the SC (esp. CJ Corona). In my blog I will stick to the non-personal aspects which unfortunately is almost impossible to do. Just the fact that his Honor was a former Chief of Staff. Ethics has gone out of the window.

  3. No laws can be broken but still the spirit of the law, Justice, has been violated.

  4. We have the spectacle of the CJ charging Aquino of creating a dictatorship. This is a weak and a personal response, something our CJ would realize by now.

  5. By associating the attack on the CJ as an attack of the whole Supreme Court, the CJ himself is the one sending a chilling effect and fear on the judiciary. The latter should not be afraid.

  6. Damage has been done to the noble institution of the Supreme court. It is now pictured as having legalized the massive graft and corruption of the previous GMA administration.

  7. The eggregious reasoning of "executive privilege" smacks of condonation of massibe graft and corruption and obstruction of truth and justice in the case of Neri.

  8. The damn controversy has ruined the festive Christmas season. we can blame Pres. Noy for starting this, and CJ Justice for providing the reason!

  9. This has awakened a lot of people to be more vocal and enter into debates which the latter(who hates entertainment?) delve low into personal attacks, arrrogance and worse even threats of physical injury or murder.

  10. Their flipflopping of supposedly "final" decisions has diminished the image of the sC as the last stop of judicial process and has the unpleasant effect of projecting an image that they can be "bought".

We will expound on these later but meanwhile let's enjoy the Christmas season, food! friends! and of course remember the mediator between God and man, Jesus Christ.

President Benigno S. Aquino's accusing public speech against the Chief Justice

We have presented Chief Justice Corona's fighting speech in the original language Tagalog. Aside from waiting for an official translation, we now present the "infamous" accusing speech, translated to English, of Pres. Benigno Aquino during the National
Criminal Summit

Our gathering this morning is an opportunity to further assess the strengths and weaknesses of the present criminal justice system, and to come up with new and timely initiatives concerning the delivery of justice. We say timely, because of recent headlines in newspapers and on television, in which the entire country has witnessed the complexities of the duties of our clerks of court, our lawyers, and our judges. There is no doubt as to the gravity of your task. Your decisions and the steps you take have implications integral to our democracy. Because of this, it is important to reflect on Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution: Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them. I remind you of this now because there was a point in our history when it seems we have forgotten this. During martial law, justice was not directed toward the welfare of the people, but rather to cater to the whims of a single person: the late President Ferdinand Marcos. My own family was a victim of this: My father was court martialed, but the verdict had already been set even before the trial commenced. With a court made up of magistrates, lawyers, prosecutors, and witnesses all appointed by the accuser—Mr. Marcos—the dictatorship exerted all efforts to skew justice and run roughshod over my father’s human rights. He did no wrong, and yet he languished for seven years and seven months in jail, while those in power feasted on the national coffers. They took away Justice’s blindfold, and tilted its scales toward their own interests.

Now, as President of this country, I have a sworn duty: preserve and defend its Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. And part of my mandate is making certain that what transpired during Martial Law does not happen again, and ensuring that anyone who so much as attempts to repeat the same offenses is held accountable.
This is why, from the moment I assumed office, we have been laying the groundwork to get to the bottom of the allegations of corruption against the past administration: from the fertilizer scam, which ended up fattening only the pockets of a few officials, to the ZTE deal, which allegedly resulted in the abduction of witness Jun Lozada; from the allegations of fraud in the 2004 and 2007 elections, to the many other acts of corruption that we want to shed light upon.
We started by creating the Truth Commission, which was supposed to look into the alleged widespread acts of corruption during the past administration, and to hold those responsible for them to account. We had no other purpose for this than to address past wrongdoings as quickly as possible. But we all know what happened: The Supreme Court said that the formation of the Truth Commission was unconstitutional. From the onset, obstacles had already been put in our path.
It is within the COMELEC’s duties to make certain that our elections remain fair. So it is but natural that they ask for the assistance of the DOJ in investigating the allegations of cheating back in 2007. The formation of such panels is not uncommon, and yet once again the Supreme Court is questioning it. They are also questioning the legality of the warrant of arrest issued by the Pasay Regional Trial Court to Mrs. Arroyo.

Also, note this: The Supreme Court handed down the TRO together with certain conditions. But not long after that, they themselves admitted that the conditions need not be met for the TRO to be in effect. How baffling of them to include conditions they had no plans of seeing fulfilled. We have been following all the right processes, and still we are being accused of picking a fight. May I ask: who in their right mind would not be suspicious of their true intent?
This is not the first time we were perplexed by a ruling of the Supreme Court. According to Article 7, Section 15 of the Constitution, “Two months immediately before the next presidential elections and up to the end of his term, a President or Acting President shall not make appointments, except temporary appointments to executive positions when continued vacancies therein will prejudice public service or endanger public safety.” But we all know how Mrs. Arroyo insisted on appointing the Chief Justice. He was appointed, not two months before the election, but a week after. According to the law and one of their previous decisions, the Supreme Court ruled that the President could not appoint any official two months before an election, except for temporary appointments to the executive position. But they turned their back on their pronouncements when Mrs. Arroyo appointed the Honorable Chief Justice Renato Corona—in a position that was not in the executive branch, but of the judiciary. The question now is: is the Supreme Court in violation of the Constitution?
Another decision we have trouble accepting concerns the creation of districts in Congress: Article 6, Section 5 of the Constitution states that every district must have a population of more than 250,000. The problem was, there were areas that could not achieve this number—such as Camarines Sur, which has a population of about 176,000. When I was still in the Senate, as Chairman of the Committee on Local Government, I questioned the creation of this district, though the Supreme Court only junked the inquiry. The question now is: If the establishment of a district no longer relies on population, on what basis, then, will lawmakers rely? Does this mean that we continue to have rules on the creation of cities, but we have none for provinces or districts in provinces? I commiserate with the new Chairman of the Senate Committee on Local Government, Senator Bongbong Marcos: I wish you good luck in resolving this problem; I tried my best to do so in my time.

We remain respectful of the separation of powers between the judiciary and the executive branches. We have no intention of encroaching on their duties, disregarding their rights, or tarnishing anyone’s reputation. But we need to remind ourselves of the bedrock principles of our democracy. We in public service owe it all to our Boss, the Filipino people. We are here only to serve the people, and to serve our fellow Filipinos with utmost industry and integrity.
Now, if there is one public servant who thinks he does not owe his countrymen—who, after all, is the wellspring of our power—but a patron who had snuck him into position, can we reasonably expect him to look after the interests of our people?
I do not have a degree in law. But I was brought up with a clear view of what is right and what is wrong; of what is just, and what is corrupt. I stand firmly in my belief that justice cannot be steered toward the whims of magistrates. Not even lawyers and judges can treat the law as a toy to be fiddled with or juggled according to what they desire.

Allow me to reiterate what I had mentioned earlier: the power of the Supreme Court, the President, and Congress all emanate from their single Boss: the people. Therefore, we should only favor and fight for the people’s interests. I swore to preserve and defend the Constitution, execute its laws, do justice to every man, and consecrate myself to the service of the Nation. I have no intention of violating my sworn oath; I have no intention of failing the Filipino people.
It is my obligation—it is everyone’s obligation—to remain focused on a single direction, under one unifying aspiration: to serve and uphold the interests of the nation. To all those who stand shoulder to shoulder with us along this straight and righteous path, have faith: So long as we are on the side of what is right, we will not back down from any fight. And so long as the people are behind us, we will triumph. Let us not let them down.

Thank you.

This public speech was copied from We don't know the original source of the English translation.

Here is another link to the President's speech: GetrealPhilippines.

Finally I found the original source, which I will finally attribute the copy above. How is that for transparency??!!

We are at a loss whether public speeches are protected by copyright or bloggers are free to copy them literally freely.

The speech of Chief Justice Corona

What our embattled Supreme Court Chief Justice said (Tagalog language)


Isang mainit at mapagpalayang hapon po sa ating lahat!
Tunay na hustisya, kadakilaan ng Kataas-taasang Hukuman, at kalayaan ng hudikatura,
tatlo pong prinsipyo na nagbibigay sa akin – sa ating lahat – ng lakas at tapang na harapin ang hamon at pagsubok na bunga ng masamang pulitika.

Sa isang iglap, nasampahan po ako ng isang impeachment complaint ng mababang kapulungan na kontrolado ng Liberal Party ni Ginoong Aquino at ng kanyang mga kaalyado.
Sa sobrang bilis, parang wala po yatang naka-intindi o nakabasa man lang ng halos animnapung pahinang reklamo o habla. Isang daan, walumpu’t walong kinatawan ang basta na lamang lumagda rito para isulong ang aking impeachment. Kinikilala natin ang proseso ng Saligang Batas para sa mga reklamo laban sa mga miyembro ng Korte Suprema. Ngunit ang hindi natin kinikilala ay ang pag-abuso ng kapangyarihan at proseso para samantalahin ang lahat ng paraan, makapagtalaga lamang sila ng sarili nilang mga mahistrado sa Korte Suprema.

Itong impeachment ay dala ng kasakiman na magkaroon ng isang Korte Suprema na kayang diktahan, na nakukuha sa tingin, at magkakandarapang ipatupad ang kanilang bawat hiling.
Tila yata’y napipikon at hindi sila makapagtalaga ng kanilang punong mahistrado kung susundin ang ating umiiral na Saligang Batas. Kaya pati ang inyong lingkod, hadlang daw sa kaunlaran ng bayan at pagpapatupad ng mga ipinangako sa kampanya!
Pasadahan po natin ang mga walang katuturang paratang ng ating mga magigiting na mambabatas. Walo (8) po ang hinain na paratang laban sa akin. Kaagad, makikitang dalawang uri ang bintang na nilalaman nito: sa isang banda, ‘yung mga reklamong tumutukoy sa mga personal kong kilos, at sa kabilang banda naman, ang mga reklamo na tumutukoy sa mga opisyal na pagkilos o hatol ng Korte Suprema.
Mariin kong itinatanggi ang mga bintang na may katiwalian sa mga pansarili kong kilos. Hindi po totoo ang sinasabing ayaw ko raw ilabas ang aking Statement of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth. Ito’y isang dokumentong sinusumite ko taun-taon ng walang patid. Malaking kasinungalingan ang paratang na ito.

Ako raw po ay isang midnight appointee. Dapat raw po, hindi ko tinanggap ang paghirang sa akin. Bakit po ba, para si Ginoong Aquino ang makapagtalaga ng kaniyang sariling chief justice na hawak niya sa leeg? Mapapa-iling ka talaga. Ang pagtatalaga sa inyong lingkod ay dumaan sa isang masusing proseso na ayon sa ating Saligang Batas. Kasama po dito ang proseso ng Judicial and Bar Council na noon ay pinangungunahan ng dating Punong Mahistrado Reynato Puno. Matagal na po itong pinagpasyahan ng Korte Suprema. Matagal nang tapos ito. Kung may reklamo man sila sa hatol ng Korte Suprema, sana ay noon pa, ipinaglaban na nila.

Binubuhay ito para painitin ang damdamin ng ating mga kababayan at mawalaan tayo ng tiwala sa Korte Suprema at hudikatura. Di po ba’t may kasabihan na “ang isang kasinungalingan, kapag inulit ng inulit, pagtagal, ay siyang tinatanggap bilang katotohanan?” Paano po naman naging kasalanan ang pagtanggap ng isang dakilang karangalan tulad nito? Ito ay isa lamang pong paninira ng aking katapatan sa katungkulan, kasama na po ang puri at dangal ng Kataas taasang Hukuman.
Nguni’t ang kasukdulan ng pambabastos, sa aking pananaw, ay ang pagdawit ng aking may-bahay sa reklamong ito. Baka akala nila na sa ganitong paraan ako po’y madaling susuko. Mapalad po ako na mayroon akong isang mabait at matatag na kasama sa buhay, na siya ring pinagkukunan ko ng lakas at inspirasyon. Mahal na mahal kita, Tina.
Walang katotohan ang kanilang mga paratang – puro kasinungalingan. At patutunayan namin na ito ay isang pag-blackmail lamang. Lingid po yata sa kanilang kaalaman na si Ginang Corona ay una pang naitalaga bago ako naging mahistrado. Bakit, hindi po ba dito sa kasalukuyang administrasyon, mayroong isang mag-asawa, kasama ang anilang mga anak, na may matataas na puwesto?

Ang mga natitirang paratang ay ukol naman sa mga pasiya at iba pang matagal nang patakaran ng Korte Suprema. Alalahanin po natin na ayon sa ating Saligang Batas, ang Korte Suprema ay binubuo ng isang punong mahistrado at labing-apat na katulong na mahistrado. Mayroon po lamang kaming tig-iisang boto, at ito po ay pantay-pantay. Ang aking boto ay kapareho lamang ng boto ng pinakahuling naitalagang mahistrado. Ang pwersa at bisa ng aking pananaw ay kapantay lamang ng pwersa at bisa ng pananaw ng kahit sino mang mahistrado. Pantay-pantay po kaming lahat dito.
At sa mga isyu na sinasabi nilang kaugnay sa dating pangulo, wala po kaming kinakatigan dito sa hukumang ito. Ang aming pasiya ay pasiya ng buong Korte Suprema at resulta ng mga indibidwal na opinyon. Ang opinyon ng isang mahistrado ay hindi desisyon ng Korte Suprema. Kahit sinumang abogado ay magsasabi sa inyo na hindi po pwedeng yapak-yapakan ang karapatan ng sinuman sa ilalim ng Saligang Batas, habang hindi mo pa napapatunayan na siya ay nagkasala. May mandato ang korte na ipagtanggol higit sa lahat ang karapatang pang-tao ng indibidwal kontra sa labis-labis na kapangyarihan ng pamahalaan, lalong-lalo pa kung wala pang naisasampang kaso.Matagal na itong prinsipio at hindi na kailangang idebate. Ito ang tinatawag na PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE and RESPECT FOR HUMAN RIGHTS.
Isampa ang tamang kaso sa loob ng wastong oras, na may tamang ebidensya, para walang magawa ang korte kung di hatulan at ipakulong ang nagkasala sa lipunan. Panagutin natin ang dapat managot, pero idaan natin sa wasto at tamang proseso sa ilalim ng Saligang Batas. Ano po ba ang napakahirap intindihin sa bagay na ito?

Ibang-iba po ang palakad sa gabinete, sapagkat doon, lahat ng miyembro ay mga alalay, alagad at utusan ng pangulo. Sa loob ng gabinete, ang utos ng hari, hindi nababali. Dito po sa Korte Suprema, ang pananaw ng punong mahistrado ay isa lamang. Gaya nga ng sinabi ko, kami ay patas at pare-pareho lamang na nagbibigay halaga at respeto sa opinyon ng bawat isa. Wala po kaming tungkulin at balak na maging sunod-sunuran sa isa’t-isa.
Ngayon, ipagpalagay na natin na malimit kasama ko ang mayorya sa botohan, maari ba namang magmistulang pagkampi ito, samantalang nakararami kaming sumasang-ayon sa isang pananaw? Kasalanan po ba na ako’y kasapi ng mayorya ng Korte sa iilang mga kaso? Marami din naman pong kaso na nasa menorya ako sapagka’t natalo sa botohan ang aming pananaw. Ito ang magpapatunay na walang nagdidikta ng boto dito sa Korte Suprema.
Kaya nga po dito natin makikita ang likas na talino at sadyang makatarungan na sistema ng hustisya sa ating saligang batas: labing-lima po kami sa Korte Suprema, upang masiguro na mangibabaw ang pananaw ng mas nakakarami. Hindi maaring magtagumpay ang pananaw ng nag-iisang mahistrado.

Samakatuwid, itong mga paratang ng pagkiling laban sa akin ay bunga lamang ng malisya at kathang-isip. Malamang, umaasa ang mga kalaban ng Korte, na ako at ang ibang miyembro na di nila kayang diktahan, ay mag-bibitiw sa tungkulin.
At kung sakaling magtagumpay ang impeachment na ito laban sa akin, ano sa palagay ninyo ang mangyayari? Simple lang po mga mahal kong mga kababayan — kay Ginoong Aquino na ang gabinete, kontrolado na niya ang kongreso, at hawak na niya ang Korte
Suprema. Paulit-ulit nalang nilang isinisigaw ang checks and balances ng three co-equal branches of government, ngunit ang kanilang mga pagkilos ay patungo sa pagsakop sa buong sistema at kapangyarihan ng pamahalaan. Itong mga itinatanim niyang gawain ay siguradong mamumunga lamang ng isang diktadura; isang diktadura na nagmula sa paglilinlang at paglalason sa pag-iisip ng ating mga kababayan.
At ngayon, sasabihin ko po sa kanilang lahat: ako’y tumututol sa walang-tigil na pang-aalipusta, pangduduro at pananakot. Ako’y tumututol sa dahan-dahang binubuong diktadura ni Pangulong Benigno Simeon Aquino III.
Kahapon lamang, iginigiit ng palasyo na hindi raw ang Korte Suprema o hudikatura, at ako lang daw, ang tinitira dito sa impeachment. Ito po’y malaking kasinungalingan, dahil hindi ako naniniwala na si Renato Corona lang ang tumututol sa diktadura. Walang katotohanan na si Renato Corona lamang ang gusto nilang tanggalin sa Korte Suprema. Naniniwala po ako na tayong lahat ang kinakalaban, pati na ang mga walang-malay nilang tagahanga. Sapagkat ang tunay na layunin ay wasakin ang hudikatura, wasakin ang ating demokrasya, at pairalin ang utos ng mahal na hari. Ito ang patutunguhan ng baluktot na “Daang Matuwid.”
Matagal na po akong nagtitimpi. Hindi ko po maintindihan kung bakit nanggigigil ng husto sa akin ang mahal nating pangulo, magmula pa po sa kanyang pagkaluklok sa pwesto. Tuwing kami’y nagkikita, lubos kong pinararamdam na kami’y dapat mag-ugnayan, magsama at magtulungan para sa bayan. Marami po tayong problema. Nandiyan po ang mabagal na takbo ng ekonomiya, kawalan ng trabaho, kahirapan at kagutuman. Mukhang hindi po niya naintindihan.
Kamakailan lamang, tinuya na naman po tayo ng harap-harapan. Tulad ng tunay na Kristianong BatangueƱo, tayo po ay nagpigil, at ito po ay ating pinalampas. WALA PO AKONG KASALANAN SA INYO, GINOONG PANGULO. WALA PO AKONG KASALANAN SA TAONG-BAYAN.
Sabi nila, sarili ko lang daw po ang nakataya dito. Ang pinaglalaban po natin dito ay ang kalayaan ng Korte Suprema, kalayaan ng hudikatura, at ang pagtanggol ng demokrasya sa ilalim ng Saligang Batas. Hindi po ako papayag na sumuko sa matinding pagtatangka na mapasailalim ng ibang sangay ng pamahalaan ang Korte Suprema. Una akong tututol. Una akong lalaban.
Ginoong Pangulo, ako po ang primus inter pares dito sa Korte Suprema. Ang ibig sabihin po nito, kung kailangan ipaglaban ang Korte Suprema, ako ang uuna.
Huwag na po nating isubo ang Korte Suprema sa ano pang pagsubok o batikos ng mga mapagsamantala. Yaman din lang na ang ipinaglalaban dito ay ang Korte Suprema at ang demokrasya, karangalan at katungkulan ko po na labanan itong impeachment para sa ating lahat. Haharapin ko nang buong tapang at talino ang mga walang basehang paratang na ito, punto por punto, sa Senado. Handang-handa akong humarap sa paglilitis.
Mga kasama, matapat kong sinasabi sa inyo, mahimbing ang tulog ko at tahimik ang aking konsyensya dahil sa pagpapatupad ng lahat ng aking mga tungkulin. Ako’y nanatiling matapat sa Panginoon, sa aking sarili, sa batas, at sa sinumang tao.
Para sa mga ngayon pa lang nakakarinig ng aking panawagan, inaanyayahan ko kayong makiisa sa amin. Ngayon pa lamang ay taos-puso na ang aking pasasalamat sa inyo sa inyong pagtaguyod, pakikiisa at pagpapalakas ng aming loob.
Mga minamahal kong kababayan, sa aking pagharap sa isang mapanganib na katunggali, ang aking tanging sandigan ay ang inyong pakiki-akibat, at ang paninindigan para sa Lumikha at sa ating bayan. Buong pagkukumbaba kong hinihiling ang inyong pang-unawa, subalit higit sa lahat, hinihiling kong samahan ninyo ako sa aking laban at mission.
Muli, isang maganda at maalab na hapon po sa inyong lahat. Sana’y pagpalain po tayong lahat ng Maykapal.”

I will have to find an English translation. It is dangerous to mistranslate any of the words of the Chief Justice.

Dangerous Times: Senate summons Chief Justice, who must appear within ten days.

The blaring headlines for December 15 are getting uncomfortable.

Senate has summoned the CJ for questioning
about the Articles of Impeachment!

These dangerous developments will make for an uneasy Christmas and worse will result in paralysis of the the whole judicial-legislative-executive branches of government!

Meanwhile, the Chief Justice is weakly resorting to innuendos that President B. Aquino is creating a dictatorship..

We are perturbed more by the latter news item. This is unseemly for a Chief Justice to say.
The only way out will be for CJ Corona to resign. His appointment was unconstitutional in the first place, but because of the prohibition in the Contstitution about the midnight appointment rule. Added to the fact that he was a fomer chief of staff of the appointing president at the time, he should have the decency to resign. At worst, history has proven that his series of decisions proves strong that he
was the head of a protection racket of the previous president. Read Sen. Franklin Drilon list of decisions which showed the partiality of the court packed appointments of the previous president.

He has dirtied the SC for his blind loyalty to his patron, the former president GMA who I suspect probably (in my nightmare) is laughing out loud.

I think Hon. Merceditas Gutierrez did the right thing by resigning. She has sat on many corruption cases.

Let us give the benefit of the doubt to his Honor, but the honorable thing to do is to resign. Resign with honor.

Tuesday, December 13, 2011

A Fool's unsolicited open letter to the SC Chief Justice Corona.

A Satire, A Fool's letter to the Hon. Chief Justice Corona:

An Open Letter to Chief Justice Corona

How are you doing Sir? May the Christmas Season finds you well in the spirit of quiet contemplation over the previous events which brought the Judicial and Executive branches of government figuratively near to boxing blows.

The Philippines after all is the country of the great Manuel Pacquio, who in case he is not in the ring, is a noble congressman from Sarangani, a province of Mindanao. You have chosen to be quiet, showing either you are a gentleman, or simply you cannot answer
the thunderous public charges of partiality and dereliction of duty.

Did you not rule that Neri does not have to answer to Congress or Senate regarding some
hanky-panky because of "executive previlege"? In effect you have legalized corruption and the nation is poorer and the perpetrators richer.

Did you not with the SC as a colleagial body ruled that the UP Law faculty in contempt because it dared one of your esteemed brother in the SC to resign because of ``plagiarism''? Instead of upholding freedom of speech, you have given the country
a scare and a signal that the SC is a sacred cow, beyond reproach, beyond criticism because it is perfect and cannot commit an error!

Perrhaps in the mistaken belief that your life's biography will include the fact that you have attained the highest esteemed place in Philipine judiciary is enough, you have not given much thought what the future generations will talk about you.

First, in the land of the good ol whipping boy the U of the S of A, your appointement will never even be considered. The fact that you are a former Chief of Staff of the sitting president during your appointment time, is a red herring to members of the American Congress and Senate.

Perhaps the fact that people of the Philippines have voted entertainment people and crocodiles to congress and the senate may have blinded you to accept the appointment as a ``medal`` in your professional legal life. But that medal is tarnished,
not by your enemies but by the decisions you have made proving that you have a big ''utang na loob''

I am that you requesting that you resign, following the lady from the Ombudsman who had the decency to resign before she got to face a long
trial. Yes, sir, resign before you continue to make people lose respect for the supreme court. Resign and enjoy the spectacle of seeing President Noy in quandary what to do in case you have stepped down. Resign, before you can add more damage to the SC and the Philippines.

Are not graduates of Ateneo often told to be "men for all seasons"? Instead you have chosen to be a man for the previous president.

Syria's Assad: brinkmanship before the final downfall?

Just how many Syrians have to die before Assad's government will be forced by history to go down?

Syrian security forces under the Assa's regime control still continues to assert authority over the disaffected people of Syria. The death toll, of the increasing spate of anti-government protests according to the UNCHR has now reached 5,000!

Read UN: Syria’s Bashar al-Assad’s death toll soared at 5,000; US singled out Russia for blocking.

Syria is ignoring calls from the UN human rights commissioner for ICC (International Criminal Court) investigation of human rights violations with the situation in Syria labelled intolerable.

Read: Syria blasts call for ICC investigation

On the other hand, Russia and China continues to stall efforts to punish Syria via sanctions in the United Nations in contrast to most of the Islamic countries such as Turkey.

Syria's strongman Bashar Assad may soon follow the fate of Libya's Muammar Khadaffi.We hope he will not bring the whole country of Syria to full chaos, where respect for law, decency, tolerance has gone out of his suffering country.

The only option now is for Bashar to step down, saving the country and even himself.

Monday, December 12, 2011

Corona impeached! Shall we be cheering?


Philstar comes
this startling news that Corona is to be impeached.

With clinical precision and with the numbers, congressmen-allies of President Aquino moved quickly yesterday to impeach Chief Justice Renato Corona for alleged betrayal of public trust, violation of the Constitution, and graft and corruption. Since the ruling party has the numbers, this is almost a sure thing.

We feel a little sorry about this, but Chief Justice Corona has brought this kind of confrontation by his amazing indiscreet display of blind loyalty to his patron, former president Arroyo. Unfortunate that the whole Supreme court suffers from this perception of bias.
From the silly excuse of "executive privilege" for covering up the corruption under her former administration, he has in effect condoned and abetted corruption!

And the blatant citation of contempt for U.P Law faculty for their strong commentaries about a fellow SC justice "plagiarism" marks the highest level of ignorance of the purpose of Supreme court, not only as the last resort for the carriage of Justice but as a protector of free speech.

But what gets the people's ire was its declaration of unconstitutionality of the "Truth Commision" as it specifically targeted the arroyo administration! Is there a more horrid example of bias for support of their patron>

The best thing to happen is for other Justices to resign on the grounds of loss of confidence. They have to be renominated throught the crucible of public scrutiny in Congress for their reappointments.

I dont know what will happen in this historical crossroad but let us help President Aquino in his mandate to create the New Filipino, stamping out corruption, and gaining investor confidence for the country and in one generation to let those "househelpers" and "maids" find noble work in their own country.

Re: President Noy vs Corona

Some bloggers focus on the "emotional" outburst of Pres. Aquino against the Supreme Court. They talk of the ideal separation of the Executive division and the Judicial divisions of government which is enshrined in the Phil. Constitution as a form of interchecking and balancing. They vent their anger on Pres Aquino for such "bullying attack" on a co-equal branch of government, even suggesting that he be cited for contempt of the SC.

Yet what these bloggers are willing to do is play Deaf and Dumb. The Supreme Court as a whole has not done its part in strengthening the moral fiber of the country, instead it has now by its actions

1. legalized corruption indirectly by preventing former executives like Neri to tell the truth and nothing but the truth about corruption in high places due to the convenient reason of "executive privilege".

2. stifled the "freedom of expression" by citing for contempt the Law faculty of the University of the Philippines about a fellow SC justice involved in a "plagiarism" case.

3. proclaimed as unconstitutional the formation of a truth commission to investigate the previous administration engagement in corruption and rights violations, rigging the 2004 presidential elections, and profiteering from government contract, re supply of helicopters to the PNP.

People engaging and abetting graft and corruption can laugh to their graves but history will be harsh on them and will be swept aside to the dustbin where they belong.

We ask the justices who consciously voted to issue decisions in support of their former patron Pres Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, (Note tht Corona was a former Chief of Staff) to do the right thing: reverse decisions (again!), which they are very fond of doing or resign and avoid future prosecution of dereliction of duty!

Saturday, December 10, 2011

Lamentations from a Filipino emigrant:

Commenting on the Presidents "unmitigated" outburst about the Supreme Court and the possibility and legality of the Supreme Court citing his Excellency for contempt:

I personally think that before the Supreme Court goes about citing anybody, the collective government of the Philippines should stick together and work together towards the attainment of substancial solid waste management program.

The Philippines is the only country in Asia without a waste management program. Anyone can build a house and a latrine anywhere and pollute the water sources. Too much politicking without regard for the people.

The government can also improve the economy and provide reasonably humane and fair employment for the people; control population growth and stop cowering to the dictates of the Catholic Church.

The Philippines has the distinct dishonor of being the number one source of housemaids and domestic workers for the world!

Tuberculosis is a common disease. People live in garbage dumps and landfills. The cities are filthy and crowded.

The gap between the rich and the poor is so stark. What happened?

Notes: I have forgotten to cite or give attribution. But I think this was posted in FB by a very close relative.

Why it had come to this?

Following the oral outburst of President Noy about the Supreme Court, the political blogging world is ablaze with endless analysis and hypotheses.

People are asking if the Supreme Court can charge the President of the Republic of the Philippines with contempt of court.

For the record, the SC has cited the U.P. Law faculty with contempt for its comments on one of its esteemed members, the very Honorable Del Castillo, involved in a "plagiarism" case.

Some of the comments in this "hot" event.

- Pres. Noy is resorting to "mob" rule and "popularity" for not getting what he wants.

- Why would the Supreme Court cite anyone, least of all the President for contempt for the comments he made? It should be defending that right! Unless he SC is filled with corrupt and inept judges, it should champion freedom of speech!

This is what we get when there is no delicadeza in the Supreme court. This would not come to a head if GMA did not appoint her FORMER chief of staff to the highest position. Utang na loob rules the day.

The onus is on the SC not Noy to prove the welfare and morals of the nation are foremost in their minds, and not the welfare of the previous president.

How can you stamp out corruption when the SC has given protection to former govt. heads with the lame excuse of "executive privelege"? The SC has in effect legalized corruption!

Thursday, December 1, 2011

Iran: What me sorry?What vienna convention?

The Iranian government is showing that it condones the attack and ransacking of the British embassy in Tehran, Iran. Recall that Britain has moved for the adoption of stronger economic sanctions against Iran due to the report of the International Atomic Agency that Iran is secretly builing a nuclear weapons program.

As a retaliation, and perhaps after listening to their leaders about Iran being falsely accused, mobs of nihilistic youths/students attacked and ransacked the British Embassy on Tuesday. The silent tacit approval of the government was evident in the general inaction of Iran guards and policemen towards the demonstrators.

This is in clear violation of Article 22, Vienna convention, to wit:

The premises of a diplomatic mission, such as an embassy, are inviolate and must not be entered by the host country except by permission of the head of the mission. Furthermore, the host country must protect the mission from intrusion or damage. The host country must never search the premises, nor seize its documents or property. Article 30 extends this provision to the private residence of the diplomats.
It is worth noting that Iran is a signatory to this convention!

Iran has been emboldened by the lackluster response of the international community before in 1979 where the US embassy was attacked and more than 40 people were hostaged by a "nationalistic" mob.

Further reading:

AP, Google News: Iran releases 11 students in British embassy attack

Taiwan News: Britain orders Iran remove all diplomats from UK within 48 hours