The prosecution’s clumsy preparation of the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato Corona has caught up with them.
Last Wednesday, the impeachment court trying Chief Justice Renato Corona decided to reject the prosecution’s request to present evidence in relation to the alleged ill-gotten wealth of Chief Justice Renato Corona.
Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, acting as the impeachment court’s president officer, said:”This impeachment court has arrived at a decision in that caucus that this court will allow the introduction of evidence and impeachment on article 2 paragraph 2.2 and 2.3 but not the introduction of evidence of paragraph 2.4. And so parties must be guided accordingly,” Enrile said.
Paragraph 2.4 states: “Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits.”
Article of Impeachment No. 2 deals with Corona’s non-disclosure of his statement of assets liabilities and net worth.
The impeachment court allowed the presentation of evidence related to paragraph 2.2 of Article 2, dealing with Corona’s failure to publicly disclose his SALN, and paragraph 2.3, regarding the allegation he did not declare a number of his alleged properties in his SALN.
Senator Francis Escudero has pointed out what was wrong with the jumbled issues raised by Article 2.
The prosecution, as expected, was dismayed. That means that all those evidence they claim to have gathered to prove that Corona has ill-gotten wealth would just be presented in press conferences, as they have been doing the past week.
Prosecution Panel spokesman Marikina City Rep. Miro Quimbo said based on what they have presented in the impeachment court, Corona has amassed wealth of at least P10 million which reported income from 2006 to 2010 could not support.
“There is a variance of P10 million. This means that there is an unexplained increase in Corona’s wealth based on what he reported in his SALN, which is also not supported by his salary and that of his wife,” he said in a press conference.
Wait a minute. Quimbo used the world “unexplained”. Have they abandoned, “ill-gotten”?
SaxnViolins, who has patiently illuminated visitors in my blog on the legal intricacies in the impeachment trial has this to say:
“What a difference a phrase makes.“
“What is the difference between “unexplained wealth” and “ill-gotten wealth”? A lot, if you read RA 3019 and RA 7080.
“RA 3019 is the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act while RA 7080 is An Act Defining and Penalizing Plunder.
“Unexplained wealth is defined as:
Section 8. Dismissal due to unexplained wealth. If in accordance with the provisions of Republic Act Numbered One thousand three hundred seventy-nine, a public official has been found to have acquired during his incumbency, whether in his name or in the name of other persons, an amount of property and/or money manifestly out of proportion to his salary and to his other lawful income, that fact shall be a ground for dismissal or removal. Properties in the name of the spouse and unmarried children of such public official may be taken into consideration, when their acquisition through legitimate means cannot be satisfactorily shown. Bank deposits shall be taken into consideration in the enforcement of this section, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary.
“So unexplained wealth, as stated in the above-cited case of Simplicio Berdon, enjoys a legal presumption. The burden shifts to the Defendant, to prove that he acquired the property legally.
“But “ill-gotten wealth” is defined as follows:
Section 1 d) Ill-gotten wealth means any asset, property, business enterprise or material possession of any person within the purview of Section Two (2) hereof, acquired by him directly or indirectly through dummies, nominees, agents, subordinates and/or business associates by any combination or series of the following means or similar schemes:
1) Through misappropriation, conversion, misuse, or malversation of public funds or raids on the public treasury;
2) By receiving, directly or indirectly, any commission, gift, share, percentage, kickbacks or any other form of pecuniary benefit from any person and/or entity in connection with any government contract or project or by reason of the office or position of the public officer concerned;
3) By the illegal or fraudulent conveyance or disposition of assets belonging to the National Government or any of its subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities or government-owned or -controlled corporations and their subsidiaries;
4) By obtaining, receiving or accepting directly or indirectly any shares of stock, equity or any other form of interest or participation including promise of future employment in any business enterprise or undertaking;
5) By establishing agricultural, industrial or commercial monopolies or other combinations and/or implementation of decrees and orders intended to benefit particular persons or special interests; or
6) By taking undue advantage of official position, authority, relationship, connection or influence to unjustly enrich himself or themselves at the expense and to the damage and prejudice of the Filipino people and the Republic of the Philippines.
“There is no presumption here. By definition, “ill-gotten wealth” is by the means with which it has been acquired, such as:
1) Misappropriating public funds
2) Receiving a commission or kickback
3) Illegal or fraudulent conversion of assets belonging to the National government,etc.
“The prosecution has to prove that property was acquired by the means stated in the definition.
“Article 2.4 of the Articles of Impeachment states:
“ 2.4. Respondent is likewise suspected and accused of having accumulated ill-gotten wealth, acquiring assets of high values and keeping bank accounts with huge deposits. “
SNV further said, “Diyos ko po. Pinahirapan mo naman ang sarili mo Niel Tupas. Had you stated “accumulating unexplained wealth” home free ka na. But now, you need evidence to prove the means of acquisition stated in RA 7080.”
Ano ba ito, bato-bato sa langit bukol ang tatamaan pati yong magagaling na subtle defenders dito?
Comments from INQUIRER
jayoliver
“The defense can cite every jurisprudence their twisted logic can conjure to justify their objection at every turn any scintalla of evidence the prosecution wants to offer, but they cant stop the truth from coming out. It doesnt matter to them if these objections will already border on lunacy as long as they are successful in muddling the issue and hinder the people’s search for truth about the fitness of Corona to head the court of last resort.
They can label every actions of the prosecutions as fishing expeditions until they are rushed to St. Lukes, victims of asphyxiation from their own rhetorics , but they can never rebut and justify the huge disparity between Corona’s SALNs, BIR records and the Deeds of Sale that was presented and attested to by Kim Henares in last weeks hearings.
They wanted Drilon to inhibit himself from the case because it was him who forced the perjured witness, Atty. Vidal, to surrender Coronas SALN in her position. They blamed Drilon for this and mistakenly view it as helping the prosecution. They missed the point entirely, it wasnt the prosecution that Drilon helped but rather the majority of the right thinking filipinos in their quest for truth. They initially barred her from testifying because they are convinced that her testimony, albeit limited (due to the defense’s inanities), will doom their case.
Now in the headlines, Cuevas averred that the Palace is pressuring him to quit from the defense panel, this is reminiscent of the “Abalos Sydrome”. This is an elaborate ploy of the defense to woo public opinion to their favor. This ploy started when Cuevas embarked on his own fishing expediton by asking Kim Henares “May sinabi ba ang Presidente na durugin mo si Corona?”. This statement, by its irresponsibility and irrelevance is surely a fishing expedition that will dwarf any fishing expeditions! And this is only Artcle 2… “
Heto pa from a non abogado-Batanggenyo ng Malaya Online:
Chief Justice lied in SALN
AMADO P. MACASAET
‘The prosecutors did not see the bigger offense of falsifying a statement under oath, an offense that may border on the question of betraying public trust or forgery of a public document.’
THE law requires all state workers, including the Chief Justice, to declare or include all assets in the annual statement of assets, liabilities and net worth.
S ince the Chief Justice did not include all of his assets in the SALN which is a document under oath, Renato Corona lied under oath as discovered by the Senate trying him for eight alleged offenses.
His SALN shows he falsified the document.
From Malaya
Chief Justice lied in SALN
AMADO P. MACASAET
The impeachment court ruled that ill-gotten wealth is not to be admitted as evidence of guilt in Article 2 of the impeachment charges.
But the offense is not exactly in relation to ill-gotten wealth. The charge against the Chief Justice in Article II is refusing to make public his SALN. With the permission of the Supreme Court the document was submitted and examined by the senators sitting as judges.
They discovered that the Chief Justice lied under oath in his SALN by not listing all his assets. We think that the matter is not exactly covered by the ill-gotten wealth law. Therefore the Senate should have admitted the documents as evidence of falsifying a document under oath.
The effect of not admitting the document as evidence ag may well mean the Senate allowed Mr. Corona to conceal ill-gotten wealth. It is the concealment that becomes the offense, not exactly the wealth the Head Magistrate did not disclose in the SALN which is a sworn statement.
This is the issue, not exactly ill-gotten wealth.
From Malaya
Chief Justice lied in SALN
AMADO P. MACASAET
The impeachment court should have allowed the documents to be admitted as evidence not of ill-gotten wealth but as wealth undeclared in his SALN which turns out to be falsified.
In other words, while it may be arguably correct for the Senate not to try the Chief Justice on the ill-gotten since the same is not directly alleged, the SALN should be admitted as evidence of lying under oath regarding his wealth, ill-gotten or not.
The Senate seems to be lumping together the question of falsified statement clearly proven in the SALN and ill-gotten wealth which became evident by the same falsification. The two questions – falsified SALN and ill -gotten wealth – must be treated separately.
The Senate can ignore ill-gotten wealth as shown in the SALN, but it cannot close its eyes to the fact that the Chief Justice falsified his SALN. There is no acceptable reason for lying or falsifying a document signed under oath.
The prosecutors did not see the bigger offense of falsifying a statement under oath, an offense that may border on the question of betraying public trust or forgery of a public document.
If only on this point, the prosecution is indeed weak.
Since the prosecution did not object to the concealment of ill-gotten wealth in a falsified SALN, it may well be said that the Senate allowed the Head Magistrate to hide stolen assets and the falsification of a public document. Therefore, the senators are as guilty as the Chief Justice. That is one way of looking at the refusal to accept as evidence the documents showing ill-gotten wealth but ignoring the more serious crime of lying under oath.
The motion of defense to seek the inhibition of Sen. Frank Drilon from participating in the deliberation of Art. 2 is a smoke screen calculated to hide the fact Mr. Corona submitted a falsified statement.
The size of the wealth, stolen or not, is not the question. It should occur to the prosecution that the Chief Justice lied under oath. This is the impeachable offense that the Head Magistrate committed. Therefore, the proof of such lies or falsification should be admitted as evidence without necessarily passing judgment on the ill-gotten wealth discovered in the SALN.
From Malaya
Chief Justice lied in SALN
AMADO P. MACASAET
As aptly explained by Senator Drilon, the question of ill-gotten wealth can be dealt with later under the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.
The prosecution left Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, presiding officer of the impeachment court no choice but to allow the defense argument that the documents showing Corona acquiring ill-gotten wealth should not be accepted as evidence.
The prosecution miserably failed to see the equally important or heinous crime of a Chief Justice lying under oath in his SALN which shows he has ill-gotten wealth. The prosecutors hammered hard on this subject but did not explain the crime of submitting falsified statement.
The whole point is the prosecution succeeded in getting the world to know that the Chief Justice has wealth, the source of which he may be hard put to explain. That made his SALN spurious, a forgery.
Every time the Senate goes into CAUCUS not open to public view, the suspicious public rightly suspects insidious machinations to make a rule to protect the impeached official (and themselves too). The defenders, the protectors, the friends and beneficiaries in the Senate do not want to be identified so they hide behind collegial rulings. But the public by their words and image created by media Know who they are. Do they have written minutes of the caucus?
Because of the alleged blanket order of Gloria for 12 ZERO cheating in the last 2007 Senatorial elections, who are these Senators who won by the grace of Gloria. Aside from Zubiri who resigned, let the people be reminded who they are. Let us have their names.
Unexplained or ill-gotten? Kulimbat ba o nakaw? Mabaho ba o Maangot? Anghit ba o deodorant? Puta ba o GRO? Putik ba o pusali? Grano ba o pigsa? Naknak ba o nana? Tungaw ba o garapata? By their very nature NO smart alecky questions can change the OBNOXIOUS, Kadiri to the upright and law abiding.
Corona can very well explain if his condos and other properties are not ill-gotten. If he can’t explain, there must be something ill in there. Di ba?
Batas mismo ang nagbibigay ng diperensya. At ang diperensya ay nauukol sa proceso ng pagpapatunay, o ng ebidensyang dapat ihayag.
Here is what I posted earlier.
The problem with the prosecution is they are working on the assumption that the discrepancy between the SALN and the ITR is sufficient basis to prove the case for removal. They are banking on Section 8 of RA 3019 which says:
That section ostensibly says that if a comparison of the SALN and the ITR yields the conclusion that the property is manifestly disproportionate to the income, then the official is removed. This applies to one proceeded against under the Civil Service Rules.
The only difference between a regular public official and a justice, is who decides the dismissal or removal. So if the law mandates a dismissal for a lowly official, it should also mandate a removal of a justice. Tama di ba?
But
The first sentence of the Section seems to have been glossed over by Tupas et al. (Harbinger of incompetence ba yang first two syllables na yan? (Tupas, and earlier, Topacio.)
The first sentence says, If, in accordance with RA 1379, a public official has been found…..
RA 1379 is the law on forfeiture.
Who makes the findings? The court, which will order a forfeiture, after making a finding of manifest disproportion of the SALN and ITR. Yan ang kaso ni Simplico Berdon, I cited earlier. There is also a case penned by Corona himself, regarding Marcos’ property, where he compared the SALN and the ITR, cited by Raissa Robles, found below:
lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2003/jul2003/gr_152154_2003.html
Lagyan ng tatlong w.
Kaya may dismissal, because a regular court has already made the necessary findings.
Can the impeachment court make the same findings based on manifest disproportion? No. RA 3019, on which Article 2 is anchored, states a regular court must first conduct proceedings under RA 1379.
But only the impeachment court can decide removals di ba?
True. But the issue of whether wealth is disproportionate to salary or not is to be determined by the regular court, in a forfeiture proceeding under RA 1379.
After a finding of forfeiture, the Civil Service (in the case of a regular public official), and the impeachment court, in the case of a justice, may employ the findings of the forfeiture court to determine dismissal, or removal.
The process of evaluating the SALN vis-a-vis the ITR, as basis to make a judicial conclusion, is only available in a forfeiture proceeding. For other cases, the prosecution must prove that the means to acquire the wealth was illegal. That is where RA 7080 and EO 1 of Cory come in, because their definition of “ill-gotten” wealth includes the method of acquisition.
Yung definition nga pala sa RA 7080, ginaya lang sa EO 1 ni Cory, establishing the PCGG.
Chi : “Corona can very well explain if his condos and other properties are not ill-gotten. If he can’t explain, there must be something ill in there. Di ba?”
Yes Chi, why not put Corona in the witness chair and asked him point blank with yes or no answers to disprove all the evidence against him. And INCRIMINATE himself which is against the law? Balooney, Moronic.
There is still decency in the Filipino which the world must know. Mankind’s model of a decent guy answered all the questions without the help of lawyers. Jesus Christ had no need for lawyers and he was crucified.
Corona is no Jesus Christ so he needs the subterfuge of the brightest lawyers money can buy. Pro bono? Tell it to ST Peter at the Pearly gates when your time comes. Corona must know Decency quite often is regained and proved in the witness chair (under oath).
Thanks humus, that answered my question.
meron bang ill gotten wealth na idinikleyr sa SALN? di ba wala?
malaking kalokohan na ng defense panel ang pagpupumilit nilang ibaling ang direksiyon ng hearing. bakit hindi nila hayaang mangibabaw ang katotohanan sa halip na puro sila objection?
pagalingan ba lamang ang labanan sa ganitong paglilitis?
pagalingan KUNG paano babaluktutin ang tuwid at GAGAWING tuwid ang baluktot?
The Prosecution did not have enough time to prepare their case against the CJ and they pick the pieces as they go along, but the evidence presented so far, for me were enough to secure conviction in any other court as this is not a Criminal trial where the Burden of Proof required is beyond any doubts..
While the country is being captivated by this Proceedings, the Case that captivated the whole of Canada wrapped in Yesterday with the Jury handing down Verdict of Guilty of First Degree Murders to the Father, Son and Wife for a carfully planned Murders of the 3 members of their family, 3 Young daughters and their Aunt..and the debate continue..was it honour Killings or Domestic Violence?
Here is the whole Story..splashed in the Front Pages of every Daily…
http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1123259–guilty-jury-finds-shafia-family-members-guilty-of-first-degree-murder?bn=1
Please note the case above were based mostly on Circumstantial Evidence..no eyewitness, no direct evidence that the girls were drowned before they were hoarded up in a locked car dumped in a Canal…but the Prosecutors were able to build a solid case to secure the convictions of First Degree murders to all defendants…it took 15 hours of deliberation for the jury and shortly before 2 pm Sunday Afternoon,Jan. 29 the Jury of 5 men and 7 women filed one by one to the Court and the Foreman read the Verdict of Guilty in First Degree…Justice for the 3 Girls 13, 17 and 19 years old and their aunt and stepmother, the “other” wife of their Father…52 years old…
#10. Salamat atty sax. Hirap talaga itong walang alam sa law, kelangan magaling na teachers. 🙂
#15 & 16 Vic
Another way if I may say so, the case of the Shafia Afghan family in Canada is what conjecturists may say as similar to: If A then B. A national culture may command, if dishonour is committed then killing is allowed. So the citizens toe the line and minimal HONOR killings is done because the people particularly the young from cradle to high school know the meaning of dishonour.
IF like the Canadian (the west in general) culture encouraging, fostering individual freedom in the pursuit of happiness is bludgeoned by any iota of parental honor abetting murders THEN there will be an epidemic of murders committed by parents and sons. Besides decimating or slaughter of many girls in high school or early college, grieving parents of honor will be visiting the graves of the likes of Scarlett, J., Britney S, Lady Gaga, Avril L or Selena. We can kiss good bye ogling at Victoria Secret models. Condoning or adopting Afghan honor culture into the Canadian psyche will at the very least devastate its economy, demolishing its current standard of living. The result of no more young celebrities.
In the Shafia case, regardles of culture or place or specific religion or its absence, the commandment applies:
THOU SHALT NOT MURDER.
To be within topic, IMAGINE if the US will adopt the current Philippine Culture on Impeachment as demonstrated by the Senate, the Media and the lawyers involved. IF so, THEN in the long term, the US might experience third world class corruption trickle down effect; a PROVEN dismal failure of a promising economic theory. You can say good bye to American middle class. Welcome Filipino poverty.
Naloko na. Mukhang may away ang dalawang prosecution witnesses – Marites Vitug, and Presbitero Velasco.
tribuneonline.org/headlines/20120131hed6.html
Sino ngayon ang credible? Yung justice na kurakot? O si Marites Vitug? At kung kurakot ang testigo ng prosecution, anong moral high ground mayroon yan upang mag-testigo laban kay Corona?
Kurakot man si Corona, may mas malaking kurakot; kakampi ng prosecution.
Chief Justice man yan, mayroong chief kurakot. Silipin kaya ng mga daang matuwid ang official na abogado nila Goyang at Baboy. Yan ang higit na mayaman.
At mukhang nagbasa over the weekend ang prosecution. They now are explaining to the public what an expert witness is, and will do. Textbook naman ang bukang bibig.
Yan ang diperensya ng beterano at bagong salta. Ang beterano, can use his own words; ang bagong salta, parang tape recorder – nang-uulit lang.
tribuneonline.org/headlines/20120131hed5.html
Still, that is a good sign. Harinaway gumanda ang laban; hindi yung parang Pacquiao versus a ten year old boy.
There is a way to present an expert witness. I hope inaral, or inaaral yan. Baka makatikim na naman sila ng lecture from the Serafin Cuevas Law School.
Baka itong mga Arroyo Justices ay may tig-iisang condo sa Belagio …. di kaya?
humus @ 18…further to the case is the admissability of the evidence that were mostly circumstantial to support the Crown Theory of what could have happened. And the Judge instruction to the Jury that the honour killings will have no bearing on the case, but to judge at the totality of all the evidence…the investigators has to reconstruct the smallest parts of the broken headlights from the Lexus used to push the Nissan where the bodies were locked in and the same small parts in other part of the country where Shafia intentionally crashed the Lexus as alibi for the front end damage…we wer all a little bit scared that that will raise doubt to the evidence and it took the Jury 15 hours of deliberation and a very lenghty instruction from th Presiding Judge to arrive at what the masses believe is the Right Verdict…It tooks 3 months of trial, and many months of pre-trial before and finally we have this past behind us…this is an isolated case since we have a substantial muslim community who still believe in this culture back in their native countries, but the Court and the Jurors had sent a Strong Message, it will not be tolerated in this Land.There will be an automatic appeal for First Degree murder conviction…they were afforded the best legal defense as taxpayers expense…
Thank you Mang Vic
Apat na pinatay, tatlong kamaganak na pumatay ang solusyon na ilahad sa pamamagitan ng isang lang talata. Ang galing naman Mang Vic. Walang balat kayo o usok pang kolambo. Sa Pilipinas isang lang pinagbibitangan magnanakaw aalisin lang sa trabaho, limpak limpak na pera ng hirap na publiko ginagastos ng utang na loob para lang mapanatili sa pwesto.
Its an impeachment court! Corona should be ask directly, guided by his lawyers when answering not the other way aroun, else puro technicalities lang ito best way to protect corona…tinawag pa ninyong impeachment court ito! why go to an exercise para masabing sinunod ang gusto ng tao pero gusto ninyo naman pala ang nasusunod…technicalities against truth!! i wish many can see this for many to remember and never forget!!!
23 and 24…we had a very solution to removing the Chief Justice and the Justices of our SC…for cause by the Majority votes of the members of the House of Commons…the complaints must be directed to the Judicial Council, being the watchdog of all Federally appointed Justices and Judges and the council will consider the complaints..If it finds there is merit to the complaints it will conduct an investigation or “pre-trial” for probable cause and if there is suffecient CAUSE for Removal the matter will be referred for the House for their own deliberation and arguments and the final voting..a majority votes either way will resolve the issue..so far there was not a case to give an example if it could be comparable to the Impeachment Process going on in the Senate..just recently there were complaints raised against the CJ, but it did not reach the first base.
I appreciate the legalese of the case, as propounded here by law and constitutional experts.
Shifting the focus to the non-technical aspects, people are just concerned with whether properties are declared (or not declared) and whether these are truthfully disclosed in a sworn statement like the SALN.
In the end, the public (lacking the legalese mind) will simply take note of basic discrepancies just noted. Looks like the prosecutors have a hard time explaining their position, as someone has also pointed out. It may turn out that the impeachment is a contest of wit rather than of truth.
Vic, the Afghan honor killings in Canada that you mentioned is not based on conjectures only. You conveniently omitted the facts that the authorities wire tapped all of their commnunications. That’s the reason why they were convicted and not because of conjectures.
#26. With all the properties acquired and millions of pesos discounts given by the real state developers to Corona, there’s no need for Mang Juan to ask his neighbor whether the thief justice collected ill-gotten wealth or not. Nagdudumilat na, hindi lang ma-swak ng prosecution, hehehe.
Let’s see if the senator-judges will be true to the oath they took to represent the people, or take the side of legalities/technicalities of the case.
“Unexplained or ill-gotten? Kulimbat ba o nakaw? Mabaho ba o Maangot? Anghit ba o deodorant? Puta ba o GRO? Putik ba o pusali? Grano ba o pigsa? Naknak ba o nana? Tungaw ba o garapata? By their very nature NO smart alecky questions can change the OBNOXIOUS, Kadiri to the upright and law abiding.”—humus
Humus, nadale mo, pare. A shit by any other name would smell as bad to any upright and law abiding nose, :).
Though, of course, some good lawyers, if mentioned in a lawyerly term, would smell it like a rose, ahay, hehehehe.
#29 & #30
Maraming Salamat Mang Robert sa dagdag Shakespearian bombilya medio lumiwanag ng husto.
Heto, tunay na conjecture. Dito sa Ellenville Yun tulog, naghihilik, pumipito pa sa pancitan, walang kamalay, parang himbing na himbing na sanggol HINDI napupuna sa impeachment ang mga prosecutors ang nasasakdal. Sila ang kontrabida sa pinanonood nilang telenovela: Ang Masama ay Mabuti. Mabuti ay Kadiri (Pang International Film Festival). Walang Salamat sa legacy ni Gloria.
Conjecture (haka-haka) pa rin: Ang nililitis ay No. 5; Ang mga hukom (daw) ay mga No. 7, mga prosekyotor No. 8. Sino ngayon ang lumalabas na marumi, ginigisa, sinusunog sa kanilang mantika? Teka, teka si Corona Ba eh No. 5 yan, yun mga kongresista No. 8 lang yun. Yun mga No. 7 puro Chef yan mga yan, assistant cooks lang yun mga mangmang. Hindi pera-pera lang yan, numero-numero din sa lipunan.
Papano kung ikaw ay No. 88,888 (kahit Chinese lucky No) sa mga sidewalk vendor sa Avenida? Baka hindi ka makarating sa Korte ng mga No 16, sa loob ng rehas ng presinto ang bagsak mo. Sabi ni A de B, mataginting (di sira) na plaka: Kawawang bansa, Kawawang Pilipinas!
Oy Mali mababago na yata habang kayang tanggapin ni Noynoy ang ihi at taeng ibinabato sa mukha niya. Ang Luisita bagamat hindi paraiso o impiyerno ay punong puno ng taeng ibinabato ng mga magnanakaw sa ibang lugar.
xman, wiretappaing alone would not return the verdict of guilty as the defense lawyer you can not convict a man for what he said instead of what he did…there were 58 witnesses presented by the prosecution and nobody will know on what evidence convinced the Jury to return the guilty in First Degree verdict because by law, the Deliberation of the Jurors will remain behind close doors of the deliberation room…but my guess is the careful reconstruction of the broken parts of the Car that the Crown suspected was used to push the car where the drowned bodies were locked in. they dive the canal to gather every bit of those parts and also at the other part of the country where the car was intentionally crashed for his alibi for the front end damaged…and all the witnesses testimonies about the threats the Daughters were getting from their father…but in the end only the Jury of 5 men ans 7 women will know why they convicted them and for what evidence…After 3 months of trial most who followed up the case were so mixed up that any verdict will be accepted…the Judge even instructed the Jury that they can find the defendants guilty of 1st degree, murder or not guilty..not of manslaughter or any other lesser crime.
and by the way, I posted the URL and all the related articles that day for those interested to check for themselves and there is no intention to mislead since Miss Ellen would not want all the details posted as it would be writing the whole articles…and wire tapped is considered circumstantial,not direct evidence…anyone can brag that he murdered someone, and if there are no corraborating evidence it will be just words.
“Let’s see if the senator-judges will be true to the oath they took to represent the people, or take the side of legalities/technicalities of the case.”
I once asked a lawyer how it feels to debate with, and dissect our laws before a judge and win. His reply was quite simple, “it is our job to pinpoint the infirmities of our laws so our lawmakers can do a better job.”
If there are glaring loopholes in our laws, let our lawmakers plug these holes because nobody wants a mob rule, right?
Why blame the defense panel for knowing so much more about the “legalities/ technicalities” of our laws? I am sure, if anyone of us has to be hauled before a judge and we know there is a possibility of being sentenced for a few years behind bars, we would like a lawyer who knows and can use the “legalities/technicalities” of our laws in our favor, right?
Our county is in this prolonged deep shit exactly because of our penchant to disregard the technicalities and legalities of our laws when these contradict what our emotions dictate.
True, it always feels good when someone we dislike, Corona in this case, is caught with his pants down, so to speak.
But a tuwid na daan will just be another sloganeering if we allow our emotions to override our logical adherence to the laws governing our lives. Most of us here rightfully condemned GMA for her contempt for the questionable legalities of her tenure and her actions as President of the Republic. Now, do we bend the laws like GMA to suit our desire for vengeance?
If there is one group that deserves our heated emotional ire, that will be the prosecution panel for its incompetence.
I believe the dream is for the realization of this short line:
“The law applies to everyone, or to no one at all.”
“The law applies to everyone, or to one one at all”. #33
That is very ideal and romantic. But are you talking of the “law” as only siding the legalities/technicalities of a case totally bereft of moral aspect? Or the moral side also subject to the legalities of the law? How is it (moral side of a case) proven then using legalities/technicalities solely?
Yes, it very ideal and romantic. I believe it is a vision worth holding up.
In my biased sense of morality, Corona is guilty of having all those properties without “explainable” means to acquire those.
I am concerned though that history is replete with violence and hatred because of clashes of morals. And I believe the moral lessons from all these led to forming the legalities/technicalities of laws.
From my layman’s view of how laws are handled (or manipulated), the intent of technicalities/legalities are supposed to protect anyone from being judged guilty “below” reasonable doubt. As I see it, this is the moral foundation why one must be proven beyond reasonable doubt.
I for one would like to see Corona impeached. GMA imprisoned. But I also would like to hold on to that romanticism that our people will eventually learn to love the rule of law because it is objectively applied to all.
The laws are not perfect. They change and evolve as defects and difficulties in its use present themselves.
In this particular case, the loud cries and clamor to not be too legalistic and technical is one of the signs that there is basically something wrong with the way our laws are being used to get at the truth.
Therefore we must listen to the people’s clamor. This I believe is precisely why the framers of our constitution empowered even non-lawyers to sit in judgment of even the top lawyer of the land.
The impeachment court is not really a court just as the people’s court is really not a court. The impeachment court to me is just the Senate acting like a court but not tied strictly to the regular court gobbledygook rules and procedures.
The people’s court does not exist legally. But it exists. It is out there pulsating in the hearts and minds of people of common sense.
Ignore this sentiment and you put the whole system of democracy in peril. The laws were made for the people. Not for a few who have the money to employ the smartest lawyers who would twist and hide the truth to set law breakers free.
“Our county is in this prolonged deep shit exactly because of our penchant to disregard the technicalities and legalities of our laws when these contradict what our emotions dictate.
True, it always feels good when someone we dislike, Corona in this case, is caught with his pants down, so to speak.”—Mon
Mon, can’t make a sense of what you’re trying to say. What emotion are you talking about when you yourself believed that Corona was caught with his pants down, thanks to the efforts of the prosecution. That means he’s guilty if we are to believe what you are saying. And you want him exonerated because of legalities/technicalities of the law? Come on, man, be sensible naman.
One suggestion to deal with these technicalities/rules of evidence (challenges for the adimissability of evidence) Constitutionality of the law for which the accused is charged is to Sort these issues in a Preliminary Hearing or Trial…if these Technicalities or Evidence or the constitutionalities issues are serious enough there is no use wasting anyone time going into Trial and when the Case is ordered to go to Trial then there is no use of wasting time in the Trial as they were already wasted in the Preliminary…But then againg the preliminary will take 5X longer knowing the antics of the lawyers and the fees for longer trials..there is no winnings with any system in the Phl when there are just too many smart lawyers of the Miriam Santiago caliber. She could have been Presiding the International court when Louise Arbour was the United Nation Prosecutor for War Criminals..she might have met her match…
I for one would like to see Corona impeached. GMA imprisoned. But I also would like to hold on to that romanticism that our people will eventually learn to love the rule of law because it is objectively applied to all. – Mon – February 1, 2012 7:12 am
The stupid thing about what you said is that you forget to see that most pinoys (out of 90 million of us) follows the rule of law. You should have stated that those in power should learn to love the rule of law because it affects the many, and recognized it is NOT objectively applied to all because technicalities and legalities are expensive and many ordinary pinoys cannot afford it. Many in power, or previously in power, are entitled to it considering the amount of loot that they have. They can easily pay for it plus the help from their fellow thief in governance. That is the problem!!!
With your reasoning, considering the current state of our judiciary and governance right now, with exception to what our current government is trying to do to correct the wrong of the past, I don’t see it happening unless you see major reform and improvement in our Judiciary when dispensing justice and on the interpretation of the rule of law.
We need the romanticism of the Constitution. It is the product of the dreams and visions of those who framed it. So in a way it is a product of romanticism.
But when the product is being used against the interest of the people, the romantics should step in and do something about how their product is being mis-used.
Some senators are already singing the defense line and are already making it appear that so far the prosecution has presented nothing yet that would merit impeaching the Chief Justice.
This nation will go to the dogs again if these senators are able to acquit Corona. Gloria, Mike and her mobsters will never be punished for their sins. They’ll be back in power in no time. Happy plundering days will be back again. We will end up at the very bottom of the poor nations list finally.
# 39 “And you want him exonerated because of legalities/technicalities of the law? Come on, man, be sensible naman.”
I don’t see how you presumed I want Corona exonerated I want him impeached. I just want him impeached because his prosecutors did a splendid job in plugging any loopholes the Corona’s defense team tries to use as technicalities/legalities to junk those charges.
This way, people can see *that our laws do work, and not merely hostage to what verdict we feel it has to be.
The prosecution team is setting the examples how all impeachable “public servants” can and must be made accountable for their betrayal of public trust. Or, they can set the example why those “impeachables” are confident that they are “safe.”
#41 The stupid thing about what you said is that you forget to see that most pinoys (out of 90 million of us) follows the rule of law.
Well, I sure hope in your version of the Philippines,
1. people pay the honesty amount for their Cedula
2. same for their taxes
3. obey traffic rules even when there is no MMDA or “hagad” around
4. use the pedestrian lane
5. that their computers are free from pirated software – pay for it, or learn to use freeware.
6. their income tax returns are not “massaged”
7. their expense account is “collectables” of receipts from friends and relatives
Otherwise, pardon the stupid thing about my half-a century of observing what goes on in my version of the Philippines.
Am too tired to jot down the rest – that if your assertion is true, that most pinoys are law-abiding, then why do they keep voting for the likes we’ve had in “power” since when?
Am too tired to jot down the rest – that if your assertion is true, that most pinoys are law-abiding, then why do they keep voting for the likes we’ve had in “power” since when?Mon – February 3, 2012 7:20 pm –
Many don’t vote for them. They won because of COMELEC! Are you blind or one of them? Do you know how much it cost to win an office that leads to corruption and thievery? Kahit talo na or against the law ang pagkakaupo basta kakampi ang COMELEC ok na. Do you think GMA will be president if COMELEC is honest? How about the girlie senator becoming a senator? How about the kidnapping involving a comelec official son? So many to list dahil sa katarantaduhan ng COMELEC mismo and am tired to jot down the rest.
True, common people also commit crimes.. but most of them who get caught pay the price..just go to bilibid or any prison and ask them what they have done. Have you seen the likes of people you depend really goes in jail?
Something a mis here with Senators now making small talk in support of Corona..maliit lang daw ang kasalanan,etc etc including you Mon giving him some support with your comments here indirectly using legalities and technicalities, etc etc
These people broke the LAW they deserve to be in real jail! Corona has no Delicadeza and only those supporting him now will benefit if he remained cheap justice and this is not good for our country! opinion lang po.
#46 “Many don’t vote for them. They won because of COMELEC! Are you blind or one of them?”
So, without any objective proof, you are speculating that either I am blind or one of them? Because I do not subscribe to how you feel, I am blind?
Okay, so perhaps my logic is flawed – that we deserve the leaders we get, because we vote for them, or as you asserted, COMELEC decided for us who should win.
From what I’ve read from your rebuttal of my preference for our system to learn to embrace the rule of law, I still have to see what your propose we do instead.
What actions do you suggest must be done?
Because griping about what we believe is wrong about the system without concrete list of actions to do is just that – griping.
If my car broke down, getting pissed off will not repair it. I need to buy the necessary parts if needed. Something must be done to fix it.
If my laptop fails to boot, then I need to diagnose what’s wrong with it – is it a problem with my operating system, or my hardware. Then I apply the necessary solution. Cursing won’t fix the problem.
I for one believe Corona has no delicadeza. But what I believe will not change the fact that to get rid of Corona, concrete and legal steps must be taken. Cursing Corona and his likes will not get him impeached.
Because at the end of the day, opinions become constructive when it offers an alternative.
Below is a satire about US election which is manipulated by Diebold electronic voting machine. Here in Pinas, the electronic voting machine is manipulated by Smartmatic, that’s why Noynoy won. Also, according to experts who did a research on Diebold, their machines can be manipulated by remote control.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ojmOESqVeak&feature=player_embedded#!
Kung ako kay Corona para makabawi ako kay Noynoy ay ipa iimbestiga ko yang Smartmatic ng todo todo at siguradong lalabas na pekeng presidente yang si Noynoy. Ewan ko lang pag hindi natuluyang mabuwang yang si Noynoy…..hjahahhahaha
“I don’t see how you presumed I want Corona exonerated I want him impeached. I just want him impeached because his prosecutors did a splendid job in plugging any loopholes the Corona’s defense team tries to use as technicalities/legalities to junk those charges.”—Mon
My presumption was based on your strict adherence to legalities/technicalities of the law in line with the defense strategies to exonerate Corona. In that sense it is easy to see you want to exonerate Corona, too. You branded the inclination of the majority of the people’s decision that they want to convict Corona based on the prosecution’s efforts as based on emotion, and I find that opinion of yours as nonsensical coming from you, having said yourself that Corona was caught with his pants down, which means that you think he’s guilty. And yet, you are siding with the defense efforts to exonerate Corona due to technicalities/legalities of the law in an impeachment trial which is a political exercise.
By the way, Corona is impeached already. We are waiting for the conviction or acquittal.
If you believed that the prosecution had shown us that Corona was caught with his pants down, there is no more sense invoking the legalities/technicalities of the law and branding our clamor to convict as based on emotion, ‘di ba?
O, ano maliwanag na?