Gloria Arroyo may be out on bail, thanks to DOJ-Comelec

I can understand the value of appointing a woman. It would be a first, and would signify the maturity of the appointing power – breaking the gender barrier, and recognizing that the law has long ceased to be a male bastion.

Nauna na ang Terminator (Schwarzenegger), with the appointment of the daughter of farmworkers (Filipino-American mother, and Filipino-Portuguese father), Chief Justice Tani Gorre Cantil-Sakauye. Sakauye is her married name.

http://www.courts.ca.gov/13338.htm

The Chief Justice started from the Municipal Court (MTC), moved up to the Superior Court (RTC) and later, the court of appeals. So seasoned judge ang pinili ng bodybuilder.

Sino naman ang pipiliin ng chain-smoker? I hope he displays the same maturity as the bodybuilder.

I can hear the snide remarks now, from the fans of the chain-smoker. Si Arnold? Yung chimay-killer? Yes. He is all that, and more; kung kapalpakan lang. But you cannot deny, kahit hindi ka Pinoy, mapapa-wow ka sa choice of Chief Justice. In fact, mga puti napa-wow din. The confirmation process in the State of California requires a confirmation by a judicial confirmation panel, and later by the voters.

the California State Bar Judicial Nominees Evaluation Commission rated her as exceptionally well qualified for the position. At a public hearing on August 25, 2010, she was unanimously confirmed by the Commission on Judicial Appointments, and in a general election on November 2, 2010, an overwhelming majority of voters elected her to that position.

The quote is from the link above.

Kaya bang tapatan ng chain-smoker yung choice ng bodybuilder?

If Arroyo is granted bail on this electoral sabotage case, there is no other case filed with the Sandiganbayan that would justify her continued detention. Her case in connection with the NBN/ZTE is violation of the anti-graft law which is bailable.

Even if the crime is bailable, if one can show the court that the offender is a flight risk, the court will withhold departure; it will allow bail, so the accused can go home, and be free from restraint during the trial. Do not associate bail with the right to travel. They are separate rights.

I cited the case of Ricardo Silverio in an earlier post. Here it is again.

So bago mag-decide si Mupas (and his hands are tied by the facts), get an order from the Sandiganbayan. The circus at the NAIA should be sufficient factual basis to allege before the Sandiganbayan, and get a hold-departure order, even if bail has already been allowed.

http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1991/apr1991/gr_94284_1991.html

Yes. She can work in Congress. It is the Court which may order her passport cancelled, or even turned over to the Court. I would pray for its surrender to Court, pending the trial.

She can go to jail when there already is a conviction. That is the only way we can observe the presumption of innocence.

I want to strictly observe due process, not because she deserves it, but because the country deserves a strictly functioning justice system.

Rene’s age is more than 70 I believe.

Sino pa ang mabagal? Ang mga bata ni Aling Conching.

She gave them seven days to investigate the chopper deal, already investigated by the Senate. The fact-finding panel asked for 30 days.

She gave the order on October 17, 2011. They gave the report on November 21, 2011.

That only produced the complaint, by the panel, as nominal complainants (parang Police, as complainants in a robbery case), which had to undergo a preliminary investigation, before it could be filed before the Sandiganbayan.

Abalos is granted bail.

http://www.tribuneonline.org/nation/20120607nat1.html

Iba nga lang yung judge.

Mabagal lang yang si Topacio. Kung matagal na hindi nagpapasya si Mupas, I would take it to the CA, on a petition for habeas corpus, on the ground that the detention is unlawful, there being no strong evidence to hold GMA.

Madaling palpalin yung argumentong wala pang pasya si Mupas, therefore, it is premature for the CA to take cognizance. Ang dali ng determination of probable cause, ngayon mabagal ang determination of the right to bail. This is certainly, grave abuse.

Dali-dalian ni Topacio, baka masulot pa siya ng iba.

Te said the power vacuum could create a Constitutional impasse. Since the Constitution specified that it is the Chief Justice who must chair the JBC, no one from the other JBC members can do so. “Any internal rule that allows any of the JBC members to Chair the JBC would be unconstitutional because that post and the authority that it confers belongs to the Chief Justice ex officio.”

Simple lang yan. Pinahihirapan pa.

All lawyers do that; para mas mataas ang attorney’s fees.

The Constitution provides:

Section 8. (1) A Judicial and Bar Council is hereby created under the supervision of the Supreme Court composed of the Chief Justice as ex officio Chairman, the Secretary of Justice, and a representative of the Congress as ex officio Members, a representative of the Integrated Bar, a professor of law, a retired Member of the Supreme Court, and a representative of the private sector.

Under the supervision of the Supreme Court di ba? So let the Court en banc order the convening of the JBC. Let the Court, en banc, as well, appoint an acting Chairman.

Tapos ang usapan.

There is no conflict with the Constitution, because the JBC is under the supervision of the Court as a whole. Certainly the authority of the Court as a whole is higher than the authority of the Chief Justice. So if the Chief Justice can convene, then the Court can convene as well.

A Chair merely presides. In fact, the Chairman may yield the Chair, if he is an interested party, as Corona presumably did, when he was nominated.

Also, if the nominee or applicant is a relative, then the chairperson will have to yield the chair. That would have been the case of Ramon Aquino, when his wife (Justice Griño-Aquino) was appointed as Court of Appeals justice (had there been a JBC then). Similarly, if Carpio-Morales had not yet been appointed Ombudsman, and Carpio is appointed as Chief Justice, then necessarily, when Carpio-Morales is nominated, Carpio would have to yield the chair.

There is nothing in the Constitution that says that the CJ must chair all meetings. So the Supreme Court en banc may appoint an acting JBC chair, until the CJ is appointed.

Anong sabi ni Alan Cayetano? The complicated must yield to the simple. Bono Adaza must yield to Lito Lapid. Convicted na po, wala nang TRO or mistrial.

Post 19, 20, 21

I said that posting bail is not a bar to a hold departure order. Eto na nga, ginawa ng RTC kay Abalos.

http://news.manilastandardtoday.com/2012/06/07/arroyo-abalos-score/

The judge said he would be issuing a hold-departure order against Abalos to make sure he did not leave the country while his case was being heard.

So kung hold departure lang ang gusto, hindi na kailangang non-bailable ang demanda.