10/3/2014 CEBU STEPS UP FOR PNOY TO STEP DOWN? In order to better or more objectively assess the The Cebu Daily Tribune October 13, 2014 banner story on “Calls for Noy resignation mount, Cebu council assembly join Lipa”, echoed and even amplified, by the major national media, the following comments are being posted since there are always two sides on an issue and there is the law on physics that for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction, with the hope that these comments should not be misconstrued as opposing the advocacies of the persons mentioned here but solely for the purpose of presenting the issues from different perspectives. Sabi nga ni Erap, when confronted with criticisms that the Torre de Manila blocks the skyline of the Rizal monument in Luneta, “Nasa anggulo lang yan!”. The Tribune statements are with quotation marks and in bold fonts, followed by the corresponding comments. “The Cebu prelate said: “We noted with great pain that while the moral and spiritual crisis and its political and economic effects continued to deepen, the national political leadership consistently failed to show the will or the capacity to respond to these ills in any appreciable measure.” This could be said of any other president in the past. Even Cory was not spared of this type of criticism, which is obviously merely conclusions and subjective on the part of the persons declaring them. What is moral and spiritual for one may not be so for another. But, the balance may tilt if the person saying one way or the other belongs to a religious or spiritual group because then there might be the fallacious acquiescence that he has the right ascendancy to say so. .On other hand, the absence of corroborative condemnation from other religious groups may be taken as disagreement. Or, it may also be argued as implied consent. “Vidal said Aquino has “subverted and violated the Constitution by corrupting Congress, intimidating the Judiciary, taking over the Treasury, manipulating the automated voting system, and perverting the constitutional impeachment process.” Did Aquino really? Or were his actions and actuations more consistent with or within the constitutional frameworks? If Aquino referred to Congress certain measures which may not be acceptable to the minds of some or even many but which are within the powers and prerogatives of Congress, would this be an act of subversion and violation of the Constitution? And, if Congress were to act on these measures, can this be considered as corruption? Congress is composed of representatives of the people duly elected by the people. Vox populi, vox dei. Between the opinions of the congressmen on matters falling within their exclusive jurisdiction and one who has not been elected, which should be preferred? This is not to say that a spiritual leader may not express his opinions on matters of state when these intersect with matters of the spirits. But, his opinion should be considered just like any other opinion of any other person. Ordination and similar rites do not vest one with more discernment than another person. Inordinate criticisms of or intrusion into matters of state may also violate the separation between church and state. Did Aquino intimidate the judiciary? Expressions of exasperations on his part may not equate with an intent to intimidate? Moreover, since it takes two to tango, was the judiciary intimidated? From all indications, it was not. In fact, it stood its ground, while pnoy retraced a bit, in addition to his filing of a motion for reconsideration of the DAP decision. Statements that the judiciary was intimidated can only sow intrigue among the three independent and co-equal branches of the government. Taking over the Treasury? The Treasury has always been under the Office of the President. Manipulating the automated voting system? He merely stepped into the voting system set in place by his predecessors. Were similar criticisms heard from the same critics now during the time of president Gloria? Or, were there only choruses of Gloria in excelsis deo? Perverting the constitutional impeachment process? How? Even jingoy who supposedly exposed the alleged use of DAP in the impeachment attested that he voted in accordance with his conscience. The impeachment proceedings were aired live. The senators-judges fully explained their votes. Even on the assumption that DAP funds were dangled as carrots before the impeachment court, the impeachment process itself could very well be separable from the perceived pay-offs. But, since there could still be, as there was much, disagreement on these, the ultimate and conclusive opinion make should be the supreme court. Has the supreme court ruled that the impeachment process was perverted. If there is anybody who should complain about it, it should be the former chief justice himself. But, other than voicing out his complaints and displeasured before the media, which can be expected of any person who has been handed a decision unfavorable to him, chief justice corona has not filed any complaint or petition before the supreme court assailing his ouster. Under the expanded powers of the supreme court under the 1987 constitution, the supreme court could very well review the impeachment process and set aside its verdict on the ground of grave abuse of discretion on the part of the impeachment court. So that if CJ corona did not seek review, why should others be more popish than the Pope or seek justice more than chief justice corona himself? “It will be recalled that, to get then Chief Justice Renato Corona impeached by the House of Representatives, and on an overkill of numbers, Aquino had bribed the legislators with soft and hard projects in the hundreds of millions funded by the unocnstitutional and illegal Disbursement Acceleration Program (DAP), wherein the Supreme Court had ruled that the acts committed by the creator, implementor and others involved cannot be washed away by claiming good faith, saying that good faith must be proved in a court of law. To get the Chief Justice convicted by the Senate, Aquino was said to have bribed the senators with hundreds of millions to convict Corona, also through the DAP. ” What is the evidence of bribery? A fact cannot be established by simply using the word “said”. Haka-haka pa rin yan. Sabi-sabi lang. Tsismis. As repeatedly posted, the SC did not rule DAP unconstitutional, but only four aspects thereof, thereby acknowledging that some intentions underlying the program were laudable. Good faith is presumed under the law. Those who impute otherwise has the burden of proof. So, if the implementors of the DAP claimed good faith, why should they be crucified. Do the critics expect them to admit bad fiath because of the perceived misuses of the DAP funds? “Aquino has also been threatening the justices of the Supreme Court after it ruled that acts committed from the DAP, as unconstitutional and illegal.” Same comments as above. “There have also been serious allegations of Aquino and his Commission on Elections (Comelec) having rigged the 2013 senatorial elections, with the proof being the 60-30-10 voting pattern nationwide favoring his nine senatorial candidates, which voting pattern is statistically impossible. Also, it has been found that there were invisible vertical lines in the ballots intended to invalidate the votes of the opposition candidates.” In every elections, there are always allegations of fraud. Other than mere allegations, has there been a showing that indeed Aquino rigged the 2013 elections. The Comelec, or to be fair, some of its personnel, may have done so, as in fact, it is common knowledge that they always do.but there is no showing that Aquino connived with or directed the Comelec to do so. On the other hand, during the time of GMA, there was more than just a showing that she instructed key Comelec personnel to do certain things which affected the election results. Her “sorry” statement was an eloquent admission of her complicity. Yet, did the present pnoy bashers ever let out a squeak? Or, urged her to step down? “It will be recalled that Aquino’s aunt in law, Tingting Cojuangco, earlier bared that there was cheating during the 2013 senatorial polls, saying that her nephew, President Aquino, was aware of the cheating, and even gave an unnamed general P30 million “to clean up” the evidence of electoral fraud.” The recollection is rather faulty and fully faulting A google research on Tingting’s tales show that she, a losing senatorial candidate in that elections, was complaining about certain acts she was imputing to Team Pinoy and other personalities connected with Malacanang. She claimed that she asked pnoy to look into this matter and that pnoy 30 millions were spent to cleam up the mess. A review of the articles on these show that she was quoting unnamed sources. In other words, there was no substantial evidence other than her mere say so. Contrast this with the Garcillano tapes.. “Of the electoral fraud, Vidal’s statement read: The total absence of any official effort to reform the automated election system, which was thoroughly corrupted and debased by the Commission on Elections in its effort to produce “machine-made” and “de facto” high government officials during the 2010 presidential and the 2013 senatorial elections, but which the administration is once again preparing to use in the projected 2016 presidential elections, without restoring the safety features and accuracy mechanisms, which the Comelec had illegally removed in the previous two elections.” The automated election system is a legislative enactment. If the oppositors want to change the sytem, they should bark more at the halls of congress and not at the trees of malacanang. “The Cebu Church leader, who said he received a congratulatory message of support from the current Archbishop of Cebu Jose Palma, who is currently in Rome on official visit, stressed to the Cebu Assembly that the transformation efforts are aimed toward correcting the “political dysfunctions” that the nation is currently witnessing and that these are “mere symptoms of the problems, but more importantly, the roots of the crisis as well.” If they are so minded, the more that they should support a charter change because it is the only way of totally overhauling the entire government machinery. They could push for a parliamentary form of government under which the head of government is more accountable to the people and the legislative and executive departments work as one thereby minimizing conflicts between intentions and implementations of government programs. “Aside from calling on President Aquino to step down from office, the Cebu Assembly also called for the prosecution and punishment of the politicians who were involved in the misuse and abuse of the PDAF and the DAP that run into P150 billion, as well as the establishment of a “People’s Truth Commission” to determine and unravel the accountability and any consequent liability of high officials of the Aquino Administration. Hooraah for the prosecution of erring government men, even pnoy after his term! For Aquino to step down just because the good archbishop emeritus et alii call for it would be the one unconstitutional. The grounds for removal of the president are laid down in the constitution. While resignation is an option, to do so without sufficient reason would be an abdication of the duty imposed upon pnoy by the electorate and the people as a whole, the source of all government authority. For pnoy to resign just because certain sectors of society call for him to do so would be similar to the fable about a family and their donkey: a couple who had their son sit on their donkey while on their way heard the people saying “why does the son not allow his parents to ride the donkey instead, they are too old to walk”, so they asked their son to walk as they rode on the donkey; but later, they heard people saying, “look at the heartless couple, unmindful of the stress they are causing the poor animal, they should carry the poor animal instead”, so they tied the donkey to a pole and carried it, and, passing by a bridge, the donkey tried to wriggle itself free and doing so fell down to the river. So who is the ass or fool in the story, the donkey, the couple or the people? “Vidal also slammed Aqino, saying: “The total failure, if not downright refusal, of the Aquino regime to comply with a direct order of the Supreme Court to file criminal charges against all the lawmakers and members of the executive department and the Commission on Audit who were involved in the grave misuse of the priority development assistance fund (PDAF) and the DAP, both of which the court had unanimously declared unconstitutional.” Again, the DAP was not declared wholly unconstitutional, only four aspects were. So, in effect, the SC recognized the prerogative of the executive to come up with a program for a speedier disbursements of unused or idle funds for various social services, which include emergency repairs of roads, bridges, reliefs in times of disasters, scholarship and medical programs, all of which may be coursed through the congressmen or local executives who are presumed to be more cognizant of the respective needs of their constituents. Unfortunately, critics consider these as bribes or dole outs. For the Supreme Court to directly order the executive to file criminal charges against any specific person would be violative of the separation of powers because the power to prosecute and whom to prosecute is a purely executive function. As stated in the above-cited statement itself, if ever there was such a directive from the supreme court, the most that could amount to is that this was simply a general statement for the prosecution of those “who were involved”, which entails an investigation, gathering of evidence and determination of those who might be so involved. This is part of constitutional due process. If pnoy bashers are really desirous in the prosecution of these malefactors, they could assist in their prosecution by providing evidence. For instance, it is widely known that Janet Napoles was close with a lot of religious personalities. If these religious men have knowledge, gained outside of the confessional, hence, not privileged information, about activities or whatever matter which may connect Napoles with the erring government men or the commission of graft or corrupt practices, then as citizens, they ought to volunteer such information to the appropriate offices or officers. For one, they could send, unsigned, pictures of Napoles and others or statements of facts detailing commissions of graft.. While three opposition senators and their aides were charged, none of the allies of Aquino nor his secretaries, such as Budget chief, Florencio “Butch” Abad and others were charged. Instead, they were all absolved by Aquino. This is not true, Recent newspaper reports were also about charges filed against members of pnoy’s political party. “The Assembly, a direct successor of the Lipa Declaration launched in Lipa last Aug. 27, 2014, also called on the abolition of the “utterly corrupt”Comelec and the establishment of an honest and credible electoral system needed to restore the integrity and credibility of the electoral process and provide a systems change toward national transformation. It also demanded the revamp of the badly discredited Philippine National Police.” This is an inane proposition. If the Comelec were to be abolished, then suffrage would have to be abolished as well. Who will oversee the elections and count the votes. Replacement of the comelec with an honest and credible electoral system would be shooting for the stars and calling it by some other name because crooks, like the poor, will always be with us. And, if the Comelec were to be abolished, this would need constitutional amendment. The remedy is for the prosecution of comelec crooks and not the resignation of whoever may be the president. “In calling for the removal of all the officials of the government from the President down, who are found guilty of culpability, the Cebu Assembly called upon the NTC to immediately organize an alternative government of men and women of integrity and proven worth, to run the government so as to prevent a political vacuum. No issue on this. We need charter change. Andy other manner of effecting change would be unconstitutional. Perceived unconstitutional ills in governance cannot and should not be solved by unconstitutional or extra-constitutional means. If the convenors intimate a coup d’etat or some other means of effecting change, they could better convey their message by saying so in unequivocal means. But, then, whether these would be supported by the people is another matter. It seems that the convenors are stepped up in classical education, philosophy, theology, in which reasoning is at the core of their education. Hence, this post is being made to simply present the other side of reason, with no intent to disrespect in any way their eminence and venerable status. While the statements here may be nothing but restatements of oxymoronic platitudes, but shorn of the legalese so as to make them more understandable (comprehensible might be deemed legalese) even to muron-eating morons, nonetheless, they are being iterated because oftentimes, as St. Exupery says, what is essential is invisible to the eye
Posted on: Fri, 03 Oct 2014 07:34:08 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015