Kasama si Zaldy sa nakasuhan ng multiple murder sa masaker ng 58 na tao, 32 doon ay mga journalists, noong Nobyembre 23, 2009. Ang itinurong nagsagawa ng masaker ay ang kanyang kapatid na si dating Mayor Andal Jr. Sabit din ang kanilang ama na si Andal Sr. Sobra isang daang tao ang nakasakdal sa kasong ito.
Pinuna ko si Calleja sa aking kolum noong isang buwan. Nadismaya ako sa kanya dahil kilala ko si Howie bilang ma-prinsipyo na abogado. Abogado siya nang Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting, isang organisasyun na ang misyun ay malinis at maayos na eleksyun. Alam naman natin kung anong eleksyun ang pinaiiral ng mga Ampatuan sa Maguindanao. Ang tawag nga doon bangko ng mga boto. Magdeposito ka lang ng cash, makukuha mo ang boto na gusto mo. Tanungin nyo si Gloria Arroyo at si Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri.
Sabi ko nga kay Howie, kung ibang abogado lang, hindi ako magugulat. Lalo pa ngayon na malakas ang ugong na makukuha ni Zaldy ,dating gubernador ng ARMM (Autonomous Region for Muslim Mindanao) ang dismissal ng kaso niya na binigay sa kanya ng Department of Justice noon sa pamumuno ni Alberto Agra ngunit naudlot lang sa sobrang galit ng publiko.
Usap-usapan kasi ay mukhang strategy ng mga abogado ng mga Ampatuan si Andal Jr na ang haharap sa kaso magdidistansya na ang iba. Noong isang linggo, ibinasura ng Court of Appeals ang motion ni Andal Sr na idismis ang kaso sa kanya.
Sabi ng mga organisasyun na tumutulong sa mga pamilya ng namatay na journalist, huwag tayong kampante kasi baka madismis ang kaso ni Zaldy.
Mahaba ang paliwanag ni Calleja at kahit na hindi pumapalakpak sa kanyang ginawa, dapat rin pakinggan siya. Ito ang kanyang paliwanag:
Why I represent ARMM Governor Zaldy Ampatuan?
By Atty. Howard M. Calleja
When the word came around that I am representing ARMM Governor Zaldy Ampatuan. Family and friends asked, “Why?” Most of my friends cannot and refuse to reconcile the need for a vibrant and fair justice system with their repugnance towards my client. I am further asked how I come to grips with defending a morally reprehensible family? I asked myself, will defending Governor Zaldy lead to anger and hatred of my family, my friends, and my community?
My response is that I do not advocate my client’s viewpoints and or what they allege he stands for, but the broader legal issues which are the presumption of innocence, due process and the right to a fair trial. And since I believe in our legal system, how can I not represent my client? Our system is supposed to be about justice and people getting a fair trial. The system must protect the rights of all, or it cannot be guaranteed for anyone.
Briefly let me state that my client is innocent unless proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt. He is merely linked to the case by association and relation to the other suspects in the case. On the only two incidents where his name is being unfairly dragged, we have solid and convincing documentary and testamentary proof that it was impossible for him to be present. Simply put Governor Zaldy was neither present in the alleged meeting nor was he present in the Maguinadanao Massacre.
Knowing this fact, I decided long and hard whether or not to take this case. The first place I looked was within. Such a decision has nothing to do with my political beliefs but is all about my conscience. As I am able to consult with the internal moral influences that function in my life. I found out that law is such a broad and diverse practice. I take this opportunity to state that in my 16 years in the law profession I have stood up for everyone regardless of age, race, religion, gender, political affiliations and beliefs, and even financial capacity. I have successfully defended an indigent farmer wrongly accused of a crime. I too represented victims of domestic and sexual violence from Zamboanga to Dasmarinas Village, Makati. My practice has also exposed me to various advocacies which I selflessly assisted all pro bono.
In all of this, I have learned that being a lawyer is about ensuring the rule of law for everyone. Our justice system is designed to guaranty a fair trial for everyone including my client. Just because Governor Zaldy was arrested and charged it does not mean he is guilty. And it is more unfair when counsels are judged for their defense of unpopular clients.
It is lamentable that the high publicity the case has received works as an injustice to the rights of my client. In such a way that one cannot distinguish one accused from the other. This is likewise true to me, my client-lawyer relationship is confused with what I truly stand for. By analogy, how come when a doctor attends and cures a criminal or an unpopular individual nobody suggests that the doctor support, agrees much less condones his or her acts. However, when a lawyer represents the same individual, everyone decides that the lawyer is as unacceptable as the client.
In conclusion, my bearings and conscience are firm. As a lawyer my primary obligation is clear: I am first and foremost an officer of the court. My first duty is to the court. I act only on lawful instructions of my client having their best interest in mind while not breaching my duties and obligations to the court.
Unless and until a lawyer conspires to break the law with his client and to bring Justice into disrepute, it is a solemn duty of every Lawyer to defend anyone, be it the devil himself, and defend him to the best of his ability…
Yes, Howard, we understand your role as a lawyer but you have to tell us how much was promised to you by your client? Kunwari lang mga rason mo. Nobody will believe you. Buttom line dito is . . . pera, fulus, money!!!
I can liken Atty Calleja to the Brothers Greenspan, Brian and Eddie, who will defend any client be the heinous murderer, shameless “scammer”, or a poor Legal Aid client and they will bring to the court all legal avenues for their clients’ best interests..whether they get paid in millions or in legal aid fund…and both are the most prominent and respected members of the profession and Judges and Members of the Juries and the Public have nothing but admirations how they bring honour to the profession and made themselves pretty rich too.
A lawyer CAN CHOOSE whom to defend, Atty. Calleja.
baka naman takot silang pahindian ang request ng sino man sa ampatuan? May abogado na bang nilapitan ang mga ampatuan pero tinanggihan sila?
It all comes down to money. Whatever Atty. Calleja says and whatever he reasons, it’s all about money and the fat legal fees he’s getting. Many reputable lawyers lost their reputation because of money. Keso sabihin nila na bilang abogado kailangan nilang ipagtanggol kahit sino, kahit criminal…lumang tugtugin na iyan. There’s what you call “conscience”. Sa daming pinatay ng mga Ampatuan, ganid sa pera lang ang habol ng mga magtatanggol sa kanila tulad ni Atty. Fortun. Fortun received P10M just for acceptance fee.
baka naman takot silang pahindian ang request ng sino man sa ampatuan? May abogado na bang nilapitan ang mga ampatuan pero tinanggihan sila?
– perl
———————–
Yes perl, meron, I personally know at least one, and I even chided the lawyer for not taking it, saying trabaho lang yun walang personalan but ayaw pa rin, the money offered was staggering, acceptance pa lang more than 10Million na.
thanks Jug! So pera-pera lang talga labanan…
Karapatan ng isang abogado ang pumili kung sino ang maging cliente niya…at responsibilidad rin ng isang abogado to defend his client to the best he can, and for the best of his client…pero mas responsibility siya sa sarili niya na ang totoo ang maging kalabasan ng kaso…the truth is his primary responsibility..to himself and for himself..to his client and for his client..that to me is the measure of the responsility of a good, decent and honorable lawyer…ito ang narinig ko na sinasabi ng tatay ko sa cliente niya..tell me the truth and I will defend you to the best I can…the truth will set you free ang sabi nga…truth is justce…btw ang middle name the Calleja na “M”..ay Maceda?
ang akala ko si Fortun ang abogado ni Ampatuan..what happened?
I BEG TO DISAGREE with most of the the comments saying that a lawyer has a right to choose who should defend. Lawyers act according to the Code of Professional Responsibility. Meaning, when lawyers act, they do according to the oath they sworn in and the law regarding to their performance.
Let me direct you to a provision in the Code of Professional Responsibility which is the BIBLE of the Legal Profession. It dictates how a lawyer should act and a violation would subject a lawyer to penalties provided by the law. CANON IV, RULE 14.01 states that, “A Lawyer SHALL NOT DECLINE to represent a person solely on account of the latter’s race, sex, creed, or STATUS OF LIFE, or because of HIS OWN OPINION regarding the GUILT OF SAID PERSON”.
Ibig sabihin, dapat tanggapin ng isang abogado ang isang client na lumapit sa kanya kahit pa tingin niya guilty ito. In the first place, JUSTICE IS NOT ONLY FOR THE VICTIMS, the ACCUSED also have their rights to due process, among others.
ASKING ATTY. CALLEJA TO DENY THE AMPATUAN’S REPRESENTATION WHEN UNDER THE LAW HE SHOULD, IS LIKE MAKING HIM VIOLATE THE SAME CANON HE HAD SWORN TO AT THE MOMENT HE BECAME A LAWYER.
As far as I know, Atty. Calleja is the lawyer for Zaldy, not Andal. Why are you antagonizing the counsel? Let’s give the justice system a chance. Without competent and independent counsel, or if no lawyer will accept the Ampatuans as clients, they can simply cry mistrial for lack of counsel worse the wheels of justice might not move at all. So instead of attacking Atty. Calleja, why not recognize his role in the pursuit of justice instead?
I agree with rose. Sometimes lawyers have to make difficult decisions. And dapat lang mataas yung fee, lalo na since mahirap gagawin nya. Dito pa lang sa internet kincriticize na pagkatao nya, we dont even know anything about the guy. It’s a difficult job, but someone has to do it, cos otherwise, kung walang tatanggap ng trabaho na yan, it’ll be worse for our justice system. THink about it.
due process is reserved for everyone without exclusion or limitation, regardless of any bias or predisposition
Let’s not turn this into a trial by publicity. The only entity that can pronounce a man guilty is a court of justice, no matter how heinous the crime. The public attorney’s office does not get flak for defending rapists, etc. Those are equally reprehensible crimes. I think that people should be more objective in viewing Atty. Calleja’s choice to defend Mr. Ampatuan. Justice is not worth having if its not done right. Afford Mr. Ampatuan a fair trial and a fair trial includes having counsel.
It is more of the corruption in the criminal justice system itself that is
The issue and not much of the personalities involve. As the elder of Greenspans Advising young lawyers “tAke any case that comes your way and treAt every judge as if he is a justice of d SC you may be arguing landmark case all the way to the SC.” and further he told them do it for the love of the Practice,, d money and high profile cases will follow. When I am 95 I wanted to hear the jury “Not Guilty” and I die.”
Edward Greenspan… The nuts and bolts of criminal defense lawyers.
he has the right to choose his client. maliit man o malaking kaso.
Sabi nila, walang kontradiksyon sa mundong ito. Kung meron, balikan natin ang ating argumento at makikita natin na mali ang isa sa ating mga palagay. Kung ating susuriin, ang mga Ampatuan ay basta na lamang pinaratangan ng walang kalaban-laban. Hindi ba pang-aapi ang tawag doon? Hindi ba mas matinding prinsipyo ang tumawag kay Atty. Calleja upang tumaliwas sa agos ng popular na pagpapasya patungo sa agos ng katuwiran? Dapat ba natin sabihin na ang mga Ampatuan kaagad ang may sala gayung wala pa naman hatol ang hukuman nang dahil lamang sila ang namumuno? Tinatamad ba tayong suriin ang mga ebidensya? Tinatamad ba tayo kaya kung ano ang pasya ng nakararami ay iyon na rin ang ating pasya? Kung ang ating batas ay nagkakaloob ng tinatawag na “presumption of innocence,” tayong mga mamamayan ay dapat sumunod rin dito at hindi basta-basta magpatangay sa pinaniniwalaan ng nakararami.
i believe that atty. howard calleja should be judged not by the client he accepts but on how he upholds the cause of his clients. unfortunately, the past weeks proved to be different … and atty. calleja decided and proved to be different. he believed in the presumption of innocence and the right to fair trial and these are what matter.
a client has a case which has to be defended. as long as atty. calleja works within the parameters set by our judicial system, i believe his conscience remains free.
its hard for the public to separate their emotions from the legal issues at hand. Innocent until proven guilty. It is our legal system that decides this; not the public.
ilan ba sa atin ang nakaka-alam kung ano ang mga ebidensya laban sa mga nasasakdal? nabasa na ba natin ang mga affidavit ng mga testigo? Kung ang sagot natin ay “hindi” sa mga tanong na ito, marahil ay di nararapat na husgahan natin ang kliyente ni Atty. Calleja. At lalong hindi dapat natin husgahan si Atty. Calleja.
lawyers are tasked with primarily fighting for the truth, the compensation (money) is just incidental to their duty to truth, justice and the rule of law. is atty. calleja being paid a huge amount for taking this case? i don’t know. but if he is then i don’t see anything wrong with it. as a matter of fact i think he should be paid handsomely for all the flak that he’s taking just because he wants to do his job.
so is atty. calleja representing an amaptuan because of the money? or because of justice? his letter answers the question but i’d like to point out that there’s nothing wrong with getting both.
Not all lawyers are heartless. It doesn’t follow that just because you defend a notorious person, you are as notorious as your client.
Part of the lawyer’s oath, just like a doctor’s oath, is to defend their client to the fullest of their ability.
I can imagine Atty. Calleja will get a lot of flak for defending a suspect of one of the most notorious massacres in our country’s history, but maybe, for the sake of fair play, aside from inferences due to association, people should ask those who directly interact with him, those who are close to him, his friends, family and students, who he is as a person.
if we clamor for justice and we want the wheel of justice to roll, the accused must be represented by counsel of choice…or would we want that the accused in the maguindanao incident be rather represented by a public attorney who gets his payroll from the taxes we pay? Atty. Howie’s parameters are clear in his statement. with these parameters intact plus the facts and truth he knows about his client, he as a lawyer will do his bounden duty to defend, whether with fees or none. he is an instrument of justice.
Ordinaryo yang mga rason na ganyan. Pinalalabas pang magiting, samantalang para sa kanyang kapakanan din ang pagtanggap ng kasong ito.
Maraming abogado na pabayani-bayani, pero ang katotohanan may pansarili silang layunin. Yung magsasabing para sa katarungan talaga ang hangad nila ay sinungaling.
Hindi mali na maging abogado ng mga walanghiya at halimaw, basta maging totoo lang ang dahilan at huwag magpa-awa.
I honestly think it is only in our country where people judge lawyers for defending their clients. In the US, no one criticizes the lawyer who is supposed to defend Jared Lee Loughner who killed a lot of people in Arizona and seriously injured Gabrielle Gifford. Even if there’s no doubt he really committed the crime. If people in the Philippines continue to pounce on lawyers only on the basis of their misguided perceptions and judgments,then our country will really get nowhere.
Atty. Calleja is a great lawyer, he can choose to defend whoever he wants to and that’s none of anyone’s business. NUF SED.
Calleja even looks decent in the photo. But his time is up as a reputable lawyer. Sira na siya sa pagtanggap ng kaso ni Ampatuan kahit na umatras pa siya. Sayang siya.
Parang kayong t-anga. Kahit sino naman tumanggap ng kaso ni ZA ay titirahin ng ganito. Nagkataon lang na si Howie yung may tapang na gawin ito.
Anong ibig nio sabihin, kung di ka sikat, kung di ka mahal ng mga tao, bawal ka na magka-abogado?
Lumang linya na yung “pera lang yan”. Yan ang sinasabi ng mga taong di marunong mag-isip para sa sarili, nanggagaya nalang.
Sa totoo lang, yung mga tao na naninira kay Howie ay katulad din ng mga Ampatuan eh: naghahanap ng hustisya through extralegal means. Ano pinagkaiba nio?
Putek. Malamang kung si Hesukristo mismo ang naging abogado ni ZA eh tinira nio rin siya ng ganito. Magkautak nga kayo.
In fairness to our country, many other countries are also into scandals and corruption. Take Canada for example. Here’s a link in the documentary “Oh Canada”:
http://ohcanadamovie.com/
#13, baligtad… sikat sya dahil kinuha nya kaso ng ampatuan… aba… madaming kriminal sa panahon ngayon at handang magbayad ng milyones o mahal basta ipagtanggol sila… o di ba? biglang taas professional fee… pera-pera lang yan…
Counsellor Calleja,
Simple! By saying “No!” Good Lord! No need to be a topnotch lawyer to be able to say that.
Counsellor Calleja,
It is more lamentable that more than 50 people died in that massacre under the regime of the Ampatuans. Circumstancial evidences point to one and only one direction, that the massacre was committed by your new found friends. You may scream and lament all you want and use the argument that your clients are not guilty but you cannot get away by simplifying your position and say that your clients are not guilty.
And one more thing Mr Calleja, just because you now have a big time family of warlords for clients doesn’t make you immune to criticism nor does it make your position to defend them all that is moral.
Well, what can we do!
Sometimes bright people are hoodwinked by the smell (or color) of money. Gloria is the prime example. If bigtime, (dis)”honorable” generals like Reyes, Garcia, Ligot can sell their souls to the devil, how much more for a lawyer like him who is obsessed with earning millions.
Sayang, ang tao nga naman. Dapat siguro dito ipakain sa mga buwitre o buwaya..
I honestly think it is only in our country where people judge lawyers for defending their clients. In the US, no one criticizes the lawyer who is supposed to defend Jared Lee Loughner who killed a lot of people in Arizona and seriously injured Gabrielle Gifford. Even if there’s no doubt he really committed the crime. If people in the Philippines continue to pounce on lawyers only on the basis of their misguided perceptions and judgments,then our country will really get nowhere.
Atty. Calleja is a great lawyer, he can choose to defend whoever he wants to and that’s none of anyone’s business. NUF SED.
This message is for the moderator of this site, whoever you are: I wonder why Ive been posting comments and until now it’s “awaiting moderation.” and I’m not even using any obscene or offensive language in my comments. I’m just voicing out my opinion. If the only comments that you will confirm are those in favor of your opinion and those bashing atty. calleja, then you are biased and your blog is a sham. You should be ashamed of yourself.
It is part of due process. it cannot be taken away from you and everyone should be thankful for that fact. If you were in a position that you are publicly tried and no one wants to defend you in our courts. wouldn’t you be thanking atty calleja?
mas kampante ako na isang abogadong katulad ni atty. calleja ang hahawak ng kaso ni zaldy ampatuan. someone has to do it anyway. bakit hindi natin hayaan na si atty. calleja ang gumawa nito.
sinasabi niyong lumang tugtugin ang paliwanag ni atty. calleja na ginagawa niya ito para umusad ang hustisya. sa tingin ko, mas lumang tugtugin ang sinasabi niyo na pera ang nasa likod ng pagtanggap ni atty. calleja ng kaso.
hayaan na lamang natin na gawin ni atty. calleja ang kanyang trabaho. walang tao ang dapat mabatikos dahil lamang sa ginagawa niya ang kanyang trabaho
Melissa, this is my first time to join “Ellen’s” so to speak. I made my first post on the death of Angelo Reyes. I refreshed the page successively to see if it got in and still,as of this writing, my post is still awaiting moderation just like yours. (it’s been an hour or so that i posted my opinion.)
Well, i don’t have any idea why is being like that but moderator has the utter discretion to accept or not to accept one’s comment here but i think my post does not transgress the boundary of decency. I’ll see with this one : )
While I equally detest the origin of all this controversy, I feel that I’m not ready to pass judgment on the choice of Atty. Calleja (or any other lawyer, for that matter) to take on the case, or at least Zaldy Ampatuan’s.
We share the same hopes, to close this case in the speediest manner possible, and to dispense of justice where it’s due. But it doesn’t take a lawyer to understand that the same cannot be done without undergoing, as cliched as it may ring, the due process of law. I believe all this talk boils down to it. The accused has all the right to seek a competent counsel to represent him. The counsel, on the other hand, may or may not agree to accept a case – but the discretion is for him solely to exercise. For sure, morality would always take a toll in his decision. But again, it’s for him to weigh. If he deems it consistent with his duty to uphold justice, then no one can point an accusing finger at him.
True, lawyering may, to some extent, be considered as an advocacy. But lurking behind this role is a rather broader and more fundamental responsibility asked of each member of the bar: to treat every accused as an innocent man. The fact that the lawyer in this case is of untainted reputation and commendable practice in no way deviates from the fact that he has far more demanding obligations to discharge.
What I find disappointing here is people choose to attack the lawyers rather than focus on the issue. Everyone is entitled to a lawyer, it is a right granted to each and everyone of us. If Atty. Calleja didn’t take the job, then someone else would and that someone would be the target of public criticism. Now I couldn’t care less about the Ampatuans but leave the lawyers out of this. As regards the supposed “allure of money”, what makes being a lawyer any different from other professions, if a doctor saves a drug lord from gunshot wounds, do we crucify them for helping him..I don’t think so.
Melissa, sorry for the delay in the posting of comments by new visitors.
For first time visitors, comments are subject to my approval. It came in when I was either asleep or busy with monitoring the report on Secretary Reyes’ death.
After this, my approval is no longer needed. Your comments will now be posted immediately.
i think it is not right to crucify the person defending another’s rights. if we start doing so, why not start crucifying the CHR. of course you people won’t do that because you think the accused does not have any rights. which of course born out by your ignorance of the law.
Atty calleja will serve as counsel not to proliferate the alleged injustices committed by the ampatuans but to see to it that justice is done.
mas nakakalungkot na ijudged nyo agad si attty. calleja without knowing him….
DONT JUDGE THE BOOK BY ITS COVER
marahil marame ng nilapitan na abogado si ampatuan at marame ding tumange,sa kadahilanan na hindi nila kya ang kaso at takot sila .sikat ang kaso ng ampatuan sa ngaun kya naman pati ang atty ng ampatuan ay sumisikat dahil sa pag tangap sa kaso,ang dameng mga comment na puro pang huhusga kawawa namn si atty calleja .KUNG SA PALAGY NYO MAY MAS ALAM KAYO DI IPARAMDAM NYO NA MAY MAS PINAG ARALAN KAU 🙂
masyado kau ma effort manghusga concern citizen ba?( oh sya cge kau na,sainyo ang korona)
melissa, easy lang… all comments and opinions from anyone about any issues are welcome here… pero syempre.. khit sinong moderator may mga rules sila na dapat sundin…
about comments on atty calleja… that’s a public opinion… democratic country tayo di ba? very strong ang freedom of expression… minsan o madalas sumosobra, naabuso… ganon talga… dyan din naman tayo natututo…
ampatuan is different to any other criminal cases… that’s why it was tagged by Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) as deadliest event for journalists in history. Kinuha ng mga ampatuan si Atty calleja not just because of being a great lawyer… i think because of his connection with PPCRV. iniisip siguro ng mga ampatuan, mapapaniwala na nila publiko kapag connected sa simbahan ang tagapagtanggol nila… yan ang taktika na hanggat maari ay dapat mapigilan…
hindi natin maalis sa mga mahahayag na tulad ni Ellen ang maglabas ng sama ng loob sa ganitong issue.. lalo pat kabaro nya ang mga karumaldumal na pinatay…
I dont think att calleja accepted the job because of call of duty… there’s always an exception to the rule… higante ang mga kriminal… sobrang mahihirap ang mga biktima… maawa sya..
Melissa must be one of Mr Calleja’s friends.
And why not none of anyone’s business? If he is really a top-caliber lawyer, his commons sense will tell him that the minute he accepted the Ampatuans’ retainer fees, he knew damn well that he was opening himself to criticism.
Nobody is telling him not to accept but in the same token, he should know that he cannot use his legal cloak as shield against criticisms.
We are in a democracy so the right to criticise is part and parcel of the whole process.
He shouldn’t be so onion skinned after all his clients aren’t. If Calleja cannot do the time, musn’t do the crime so the saying goes! 😛
nah. marami pang satsat. calleja is one bs artist, if he really wanted to defend the ampatuads purely because of the spirit of the law he should have accepted it “pro bono” he’s just one of those money grabbing sharks.
and whoever said that people in the US don’t despise these lawyers probably meant united states of sudtonggan (some remote island in the south)
Spot on Jug! 🙂 🙂 🙂
As a lawyer my primary obligation is clear: I am first and foremost an officer of the court.
————————-
its double talk. what he was really thinking was “As a lawyer my primary obligation is clear: I have an obligation to my pocket”
tulad ng isang doktor na hindi dapat namimili ng kung sino ang gagamutin maging kalaban man o kaibigan, ganun din ang tungkulin ng isang abogado, ang ipagtanggol ang taong humihingi ng serbisyong legal – masigurado na mabibigyan ng hustisya ang kanyang kliyente. Kung masintensyahan man ito ay dapat naayon sa batas at hindi ng simpleng paratang lang, nangangailangan ito ng solidong basehan. Kung naniniwala tayong malaks ang kaso laban kay ampatuan, dapat ay wala na tayong agam agam na masesentensiyahn sya. parang napakadali kasing tumanggi na maging abogado ni ampatuan dahil sa magkabilang batikos ng media, yung iba dinadahilan na dikta raw ng konsensiya, ngunit kung iisipin, di ba’t parang hinusgahan na nila agad ang mga pangyayari. nandyan ang korte, hayaan na lang natin na sila ang magdesisyun. kung may sala nga si ampatuan eh di parusahan, kung wala eh di palayain. ginagampanan lang ni atty. calleja ang kanyang tungkulin, ang pagiging abogado, isang opisyal ng korte at hindi ng sinumang tao. isipin nyo na lang, kung ikaw ang nasa kalagayan na mapagbintangan, nanaisin mo bang walang tumanggap ng iyong kaso dahil dikta raw ng konsensiya kahit di pa nalilitis ang iyong kaso? Kung magagalit man tayo, ituon na lang natin sa may sala at hindi sa taong tumutupad lang sa sinumpaan nyang tungkulin. mayroon tayong sarisariling opinyon sa mga bagay bagay, igalang na lang natin ang desisyon ng bawat isa.
This is just me giving words to my thoughts….
I’m thinking of the what ifs…
And believe I watched an American movie about this lawyer who won a case for his client who he knew is guilty but still he represented him, and because of a technicality, his client went scot-free and all hell broke loose after his client was freed…. I don’t know if it’s a Mafia boss or something else….
Ang pagsisisi ay nasa huli…
I am one of Atty. Calleja’s clients who lacks financial capacity. I was fighting against a rich politician and I was just an ordinary employee. I lost my job and almost everything that I had because of the case. No lawyer would take my case in my province because of my opponent’s money and influence. I got to know Atty. Calleja from an article in a newspaper and out of desperation, I came to him. Atty. Calleja never denied me and gave me the opportunity to have my day in court. He fought fiercely for me, in a place where he knows no one. We have proven my allegations in the lower court and the case continuous. I will enumerate these excerpts from his letter, because this is what he really is. He is a true, good man.
1. I take this opportunity to state that in my 16 years in the law profession I have stood up for everyone regardless of age, race, religion, gender, political affiliations and beliefs, and even financial capacity.
2. I too represented victims of domestic and sexual violence from Zamboanga to Dasmarinas Village, Makati. My practice has also exposed me to various advocacies which I selflessly assisted all pro bono.
If Atty. Howard Calleja decided to represent Governor Zaldy Ampatuan, then he is just exercising his conviction and answering the call of duty. No one has the right to judge both until all facts and evidences are presented and proven. Let us not make this as another publicity trial. This kind of culture had already brought a lot of casualties in our country. Let us not pre-judge, instead, try to mentally evolve and open our minds.
Maliit ang P5M acceptance fee ni Calleja. Di naman siya ka-level ni Fortun na tumanggap ng P10M acceptance fee.
There are three types of people I don’t trust and try to avoid: Politician, Accountant, and Lawyer. Gusto ko rin idagdag ang Religious Preacher.
gaya ng mountains of snow dito na hindi pa natutunaw ang Ampatuan natabunan din..Everytime I pass by St. Peter’s College, nakikita ko ang isang buck hoe at isang portion na hangang ngayon, it has been more than a year, na hukay pa rin…hindi maalis sa isip ko ang images of what I saw sa news item noon…at hindi ako magtataka kung may mga buhay pa ang were just buried…like the ones during the term of Imelda sa Roxas Blvd… hanggang ngayon wala pa rin nangyayari…btw is there is a statute of limitation in cases like this???
Zoraya,
I don’t think anybody here is criticising Mr Calleja for defending the underdog pro-bono, eg., your case.
He is being criticised for accepting retainer’s fee from the Ampatuans.
What he’s done in service of the underdog must be commended but he must understand, and so must his friends, that his defending the Ampatuans has left him open to criticism. It’s part and parcel of democracy and free speech.
Reply to No. 52: I prefer to have zero client than accept the Ampatuan case. There’s such a thing as conscience. Bilang abogado, tatanggapin mo ba ang isang kaso na alam mo siya ang utak? Yes, it’s his right and legal duty to provide legal assistance even to criminals. I’m just speaking of conscience here. Did you ask him how much he got paid by Ampatuan?
Ang daming bagong usernames a. Kuyog kung sumugod. Pero iisa ang style ng panulat.
Malinaw naman ang posisyon ni Ellen, paano niyang natanggap na kliyente ang isang pamilyang talamak sa pandaraya tuwing may eleksiyon samantalang siya rin ay abugado ng PPCRV? Unethical ito dahil merong conflict of interest. Bawal di ba, atitiway!
Ganito yan e.
“Babantayan ko sila para hindi makapandaya sa eleksiyon, isa kasi yan sa advocacies ko. Kaya volunteer lawyer ako ng PPCRV…libre!”
“Pero pag pumatay sila ng 58 tao na karamihan taga-media at babae, aba e ipagtatanggol ko sila…May bayad siyempre. We ‘no kung mandaraya sila sa eleksyon, it is irrelevant, your honor?”
@AnnaDeBrux:
Just to answer your comment, especially this one:
“He is being criticized for accepting retainer’s fee from the Ampatuans.”
Being a lawyer like a doctor is a profession, a job. Anybody who exercise effort and skill to serve the need of someone’s interest deserves to be paid. It’s a bargain, setting aside the moral belief of the lawyer.
If Atty. Calleja wrote this letter, it’s only an answer to your “It’s part and parcel of democracy and free speech.”
I don’t think further comment is relevant and needed.
Indeed, Zoraya! Further comment is unecessary. Just to let you know I appreciate your inputs.
“Ang daming bagong usernames a. Kuyog kung sumugod. Pero iisa ang style ng panulat.” – tt
Reckon there’s only five hawkeyed posters here who really monitors him, lol…..oks naman, gives me something to laugh about especially “that part” when he agrees with who else? himself!, sana agree after one day, not pronto,hehe…
In fairness to the democratic process, anyone is entitled to have a lawyer. The problem is; this is the Philippines.
There is no jury to decide after everything is said and done but rather a judge who most likely was bought (which is a sign of an honest judge…stay bought!).
Atty Causing’s crusade for a “jury system” instilled in our judicial system is one that will be impossible to implement in a country where fear and intimidation is the norm, compounded with greed and corruption.
Atty Causing btw was a co-poster at Cocoy’s blog before it was sabotaged by the Russians.
I admire his sincere intension but not in this country even if we profess democracy reigns in Pinas .
@57 TonGuE-tWisTeD
“Pero pag pumatay sila ng 58 tao na karamihan taga-media at babae, aba e ipagtatanggol ko sila…May bayad siyempre. We ‘no kung mandaraya sila sa eleksyon, it is irrelevant, your honor?”
Who are you to judge? ok naman mag criticize at mag opinion basta may fact. wala naman kayong alam sa buong pangyayari kya hintayin nalang natin kung anu desisyon ng korte. andun ka ba? paano mo nasabi lahat yan? Ano yan Trial by Publicity??
Hindi yan trial by publicity (gasgas na masyado these days). Okey lang sa akin yang pananaw mo. Kahit sabihin mo pang nandoon ka, sino namang gagong maniniwala sayo na hindi sila pinatay ng mga Ampatuan, sige nga? Tumestigo ka nga, tignan natin!
Pero hindi yan ang topic kaya mali ang hirit mo. Meron ka pang “who are you to judge?” pero nag-judge ka rin dahil sabi mo wala kaming alam sa buong pangyayari. Kilala mo ba ako? Yung mga regulars dito? Alam mo ba ang alam ng mga journalists dito, gaya ni Ellen?
Sa post ni Ellen na ito, wala akong pakialam kung pinatay man sila ng mga Ampatuan o hindi. Lalong wala akong pakialam kahit pa sabihin mong nagsuicide silang lahat gaya ni Reyes.
Ang punto rito, si Calleja. Abugado ka, pro-bono pa, para labanan ang mga kawatan, pero abugado ka rin nung mga kawatan mismo. Ang tawag diyan, LAGARENG HAPON. Yan yung lagareng dalawang direksyon kung kumagat sa kahoy, kumakagat pag patulak, pero kumakagat din pabalik. Yan ang fact na hinahanap mo.
Kung dumating ang pagkakataong nagkasabay nangailangan ng serbisyo yung PPCRV at si Ampatuan, alin ang bibitiwan mo, yung nagbabayad?
Kung wala ka namang bibitiwan sa dalawa, saan mo ibubuhos ang oras mo, sa libre?
No further questions, your honor.
Lecture-an nga kita, bata. Hindi kailangan ng facts, physical presence, ebidinsya (abaw linti), lalong hindi ang buong pangyayari, para makabuo ng opinyon o kritisismo. Ang tawag diyan – stock knowledge. Alam mo ang kuryente di ba? Nakakita ka na ba ng electricity? Magnetism, alam mo rin yan, nakakita ka na ba ng magnetic flux? Are these not facts. Physically proven facts? Sa relihiyon, nakita mo ba si Jesus, si Mohammed? Pahiram nito – nandun ka ba? Ikaw, sino sinasamba mo?
Okey, sabi mo hintayin ang korte. Lahat ba ng nakakulong guilty? Hindi ba nagkakamali, sinadya man o honest mistake, ang mga huwes?
Kaya dumadami ang mga usisero sa Pinas kasi kailangan pang makita ng personal yung pangyayari para maniwala.
Wala kang karapatang pigilan ang sinumang magbigay ng opinyon, lalo na kung base lamang sa panantayan mong butas-butas.
let us put it this way. now that matters are brought before the proper fora, would it not be better to let things take its course? sadly, there are some people who, instead of taking the back seat and see how justice takes its course, look at atty. calleja as if he is the one being tried in the case.
let us not take the case personally, or atty. calleja for that matter. what is needed is an open mind for us to appreciate the facts. otherwise, what the government and the agencies concerned are doing would be pointless. let’s end pre-judgments.
You are not saying exactly what you mean. I’ll do it for you.
“Nasa korte na yan, tahimik na lang kayo!”
Gloryang-Glorya.
Let’s end pre-judgments.
No one, yes, no one can dictate how and when I can exercise my rights to speak.
“I may disagree with what you are saying, but I will defend your right to say it”. Even Calleja will agree with that, I’m sure.
just make short comment… less talk less mistake hahahaha, religion is based on faith not on facts. you believe in God because of faith you don’t have to see Him to believe… hahahha
yung stock knowledge mo naka stock pa :)hahahaha
inum ka nalang ng nestea :)hahahaha
Faith not facts. Ikaw na ngayon ang nagsasabing di kailangan ang facts para makabuo ng opinyon o paniniwala. You have just contradicted yourself again. Azkals: 2 – Puzakals: 0
Nice try. Aral pa.