Pinay immigrant lashes at immigration fraud

by Alex P. Vidal

NEW WESTMINSTER, British Columbia – Brandishing a placard that screamed: “Stop immigration fraud” and joining a small group of protesters led mostly by Indian immigrants along 76th Avenue in Surrey recently, Patricia Intrepido-Voigh sought for better regulation of immigration consultants from the federal government.

“I am not against personalities but the system,” 48-year-old Voigh, a mother of two, boomed as she lashed at the “mushrooming of unscrupulous immigration consultants that don’t have good standing with the CSIC (Canadian Society of Immigration Consultants).”

Born in Polomolok, South Cotabato in the Philippines, Intrepido-Voight migrated to Canada and stayed in Ontario from 1989 to 1996 when she married a Canadian accountant she met while working as hotel clerk in Singapore in 1988.

They transferred in British Columbia in 1997 where she operates a cleaning service.

She bewailed that she already spent nearly $25,000 in “blood money” to certain immigration consultants to facilitate the papers of her brother and sister in Koronadal, Cotabato in the Philippines in vain.

“Everytime I went to their offices, they were either out-of-the-country or had appointments,” Intrepido-Voigh lamented. She refused to name the consultants but admitted the money she allegedly paid to facilitate the visas of her brother and sister “is no longer refundable.”

NIGHTMARE

She was not sure if the applications were filed reportedly in Buffalo, New York but the consultants “have been giving me a nightmare.”

“They don’t have the decency to explain to me the chances of my brother and sister or if there is possibility that I could recover my money but they appeared so decent when they received my money,” Intrepido-Voigh protested.

Protesters were demanding from the federal government that consultants be bonded and restricted from making false promises and guarantees.
“Some unscrupulous consultants are taking advantage of the applicants’ desperation to obtain a visa in order to stay and work in Canada,” a fellow protester from Burnaby added.

An immigrant lawyer has reported that Canada’s immigration system has created “a recipe for disaster” and it’s not surprising five people — including a senior immigration official — have been charged with corruption and fraud.

According to Lorne Waldman, Canada’s immigration system falls down in three key areas. “You create programs that create desperation — couple that with junior officials having a lot of power, and lack of supervision,” he said. “Those three things together are a recipe for disaster.”

COUNTRY OF CHOICE

Despite being known as a country of bitterly cold weather, Canada is a country of choice among many Filipinos – both professional and skilled workers alike. Filipinos’ immigration to Canada has become a favorite topic nowadays among most of working age Filipino women and men, both in the Philippines and also those who were already working outside of the country.

Statistics show that there are 700,000 new graduates yearly in the Philippines and these young people have nowhere to find a suitable employment after graduation. Many of them would work in call center agencies, many more will find temporary employment abroad but majority are thinking about immigration to Canada as their passport to a better future, it was reported.

Intrepido-Voigh said despite her woes, she is not losing her hope to bring in her brother and sister, who are both computer literates.

“I know that in the field of all possibilities, they we will survive here. We will soon be able to overcome this problem once the government has started regulating the (immigration) industry and separating the chaffs from the grain,” she concluded.

Immigration solution: Will there ever be one?

ON DISTANT SHORE
by Val G. Abelgas

Arizona’s immigration law has reignited an emotional debate that threatens to divide the country once again, just as slavery sent the United States into a catastrophic civil war a century and a half ago, and just as segregation brought tumult to the nation decades ago.

For decades, nay for centuries, Americans have argued over immigration. The conservatives, who have shown an innate fear for anything new, including newcomers, want those who are here illegally to be kicked out and for the doors to legal immigration to be tightened. The pro-immigrant activists want all those who have been working and living in the United States – some 12 million of them – to be legalized and given a path to citizenship, and to allow them to be reunited with the family members they left behind.

For years, it seemed that theirs was a case of “East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.”

On December 16, 2005, the House of Representatives, still under the control of the conservative Republicans, passed a similar bill as that of Arizona’s SB 1070 that sought to make criminals out of illegal immigrants and those who harbor them. The Sensenbrenner Bill, named after its principal author, Wisconsin Republican Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, at the same time mandated the building of a huge wall across more than a thousands of miles across the US-Mexican border with high-technology surveillance equipment.

The Sensenbrenner Bill was passed by a vote of 239 to 182 (with 92% of Republicans supporting, 82% of Democrats opposing), but did not pass the Senate. The bill triggered massive protests the next year.

The more liberal Senate, on the other hand, proposed in early 2006 a bill that called for increased border security and related measures, but also tried to find a way to legalize some of the illegal aliens and putting in place a guest worker program that would allow thousands more of needed workers for American farms and businesses.

The mid-term elections came and the great immigration debate was once again relegated to the dustbin. The Arizona law, authored by staunch Republican Russel Pearce, pushed back the debate to the forefront.

The Arizona law copied most of the provisions of the Sensenbenner Bill, and allowed local police officers to stop people on “reasonable suspicion” that they are illegal immigrants and require them to show proof of legal residence or citizenship.

The law exposes ethnic minorities, especially Latinos, to “racial profiling” and other discriminatory acts. At the same time, it could discourage illegal immigrants from reporting crimes, emboldening criminals to prey on them.

There is no question that the unchecked entry of illegal immigrants has been a major source of irritants among the people of the United States. On one side, conservatives are claiming that illegal immigrants are taking jobs from American citizens, are causing a big drain on US funds for public services, and are responsible for raising crime rates in several US cities, and are making a mockery of US immigration laws.

On the other side, pro-immigrant activists are claiming that the failure of the government to give illegal immigrants a path to citizenship has kept them living “under the shadows,” and unable to take a fair share of the opportunities offered by the US economy and a full share of public services, for which they have contributed much through their hard work and taxes. They also said that because of their status, the undocumented immigrants are unable to reunite with their families. Thus, they should be legalized, given a path to citizenship and be reunited with their families.

Such extreme views are hard to reconcile, and for years, the nation’s leaders have tried to find a compromise formula that would be acceptable to the majority.

The conservatives are saying “No way!” while the pro-immigrant extremists are saying “Thanks, but no thanks!” One of them has got to give, or both of them would have to give up a little and take a little, thus a compromise solution to the nagging problem.

The conservatives, calling earlier compromise proposals an amnesty, say there is no way they would accept any form of amnesty for people who broke the law. They insist that the illegals should be punished and deported, instead of rewarded and given a chance to become citizens, while hundreds of thousands have been waiting in line for years.

The pro-immigrant activists, on the other hand, claimed that the path to citizenship offered in 2006 was, at the very least, circuitous and full of danger. For example, why does the breadwinner have to go back to his home country and await his or her visa there? Who would provide for the children while the head of household is away, which could take a year or more? Will his employer wait for him that long?

Under the 2006 proposal, the illegal alien would be given temporary, but indefinite “Z” visa that would allow him to work in the US and his dependents to stay with him. However, he has to wait until the backlog of pending immigrant visa applications is removed, which could take from 8 to 13 years. Also, no green card applications will be accepted until full border security measures have been put in place, which could also take 8 to 15 years. In the meantime, these “Z’ visa holders would pay their taxes and contribute to the economy without getting the benefits of citizenship.

The biggest drawback to the proposal, however, is the plan to limit family petitions in favor of a merit-based system, wherein the granting of immigrant visa would be based on how the prospective immigrant could contribute to the American economy and society, instead of on the need for family reunification.

Under the compromise plan, citizens can no longer petition adult children and siblings, while the annual quota for petitioned parents would be reduced from 90,000 to 40,000.

With these drawbacks and with the insistence of the conservatives to deport all undocumented aliens, will there ever be an acceptable comprehensive immigration reform program?

The nagging immigration problem has divided the American people since the first immigrant group arrived after the Pilgrims. It definitely needs a lasting solution, one that may never come unless the extremists on either side of the immigration divide accept realities and commit to a compromise.

(valabelgas@aol.com)

A History of Betrayal

PerryScope
by Perry Diaz

After the failed attempt to cast doubt on the accuracy and veracity of the May 10 presidential elections with the video interview of “Robin” — a.k.a. “Koala Boy” — one wonders if this was all part of a NO-PROC (no-proclamation) scenario reputedly concocted by people associated with President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo. With the subsequent actions of Gloria’s henchmen, it seems that the presidential race is far from over, in spite of the fact that President-apparent Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III commands a five-million vote advantage over his nearest opponent, former president Joseph “Erap“ Estrada. For some reason, it gives me a creepy feeling that NO-PROC is still in the works.

Consider that Speaker Prospero Nograles plans to move back the proclamation from June 4 to June 30, the last day of the current Congress which is also the last of Gloria’s presidency. He was quoted as saying that “the Senate and the House of Representatives, convening as the national board of canvassers, would proclaim the winning president and vice president ‘on or before high noon of June 30.’ ” But what if Congress fails to proclaim Noynoy by noon on June 30?

What exactly was on Nograles’ mind by deferring the proclamation until noon on June 30? That’s a 26-day delay! And what if there was no quorum in Congress on June 30 to proclaim the president and vice president?

Imagine…

Imagine Noynoy at the Luneta grandstand in front of tens of thousands cheering Filipinos waiting to witness the historic event.

Imagine the presence of foreign heads of states and dignitaries sitting behind Noynoy in the grandstand waiting for the official word from Congress.

Imagine Nograles and Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile adjourning Congress for lack of quorum, never to meet again since it was the last day of the current Congress.

Imagine Gloria stepping down from the presidency only to assume it again as holdover president until the new president and vice president were proclaimed by the new Congress.

And imagine what could possibly ensue: people power, military takeover, coup d’etat, chaos, pandemonium, anarchy… and, possibly, bloodshed?

Betrayals and conspiracies

The power vacuum created by a NO-PROC scenario could bring the country back to the time of our fight for independence — the unfinished revolution of 1896. The Katipunan was making progress notwithstanding the superiority of the trained and well-armed colonial army. But the political warfare between the Magdiwang faction of Supremo Andres Bonifacio and the Magdalo faction of Gen. Emilio Aguinaldo led to armed confrontation between the two groups. They failed to coalesce their forces and fight side by side against the enemy. In the end the revolution lost its purpose and the leaders lost their souls to greed and lust for power.

Fast forward to 1986. The “people power” revolution — known as EDSA 1 — deposed the tyrant Ferdinand Marcos and installed a revolutionary government led by Cory Aquino. But her presidency was rocked by coup d’etats perpetrated by military factions loyal to Marcos. Cory survived the assaults on her presidency and moved to change the constitution, which to this day is the supreme law of the land.

But in 2001, a coup d’etat disguised as “people power” revolution — EDSA 2 — ousted president Estrada and installed then vice president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo in his place. It was a clean surgical execution made possible with the betrayal of Erap by his Armed Forces Chief of Staff and the “blessing” of the Supreme Court. Within an hour of informing Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. of the removal of Estrada, Gloria was sworn in by Davide as “president,” not “acting president” as Erap was made to believe. So, in a swift and unscripted act of judicial discretion — or indiscretion — Gloria became “president.”

Gloria’s Machiavellian machinations lend credence to the leeriness of many people who believe that it’s not over until Gloria is off stage. People would still remember when Gloria, back in December 2003, vowed in front of the shrine of Dr. Jose Rizal that she will not run for president in the 2004 elections. Not only did she break her promise, she allegedly cheated in the elections to make sure that she would remain in power for the next six years.

And when the end of her presidency was within sight, she moved to extend her rule by amending the constitution. She ran a campaign to gather signatures for a people’s initiative to replace the presidential system with a parliamentary form of government. She got more signatures than what was required. All that remained to be done for her to stay in power as Prime Minister of the Parliament was the Supreme Court’s “blessing,” just like it did for her in 2001. However, in November 2006, the Supreme Court, with a razor-thin 8-7 majority, issued a ruling penned by Associate Justice Antonio T. Carpio rejecting the people’s initiative. It was a death blow to Gloria’s dream of extending her term of office.

But Gloria didn’t give up. She tried another approach. When her presidency was coming to an end, she ran for a congressional district seat representing her province, Pampanga. She said that she wanted to pursue charter change in Congress. She probably thought that with 159 congressmen under Lakas-Kampi-CMD, she’d be a shoo-in for the Speakership. However, that’s predicated on all of them reelected last May 10. But with just a little over 100 congressmen allied with her who made it to the next Congress, she doesn’t have the number to win the Speakership. And with Noynoy becoming president, it is anticipated that Gloria would be betrayed by many of her party mates who would join or go into alliance with Noynoy’s Liberal Party. She knows how the presidency works and come July 1, she will be outside looking in — just another member of Congress begging for pork.

The ultimate betrayal

Gloria knows what “betrayal” is. She studied it and used it as a means to an end. Indeed, she was so good at it that it would have made Lucrezia Borgia look like a convent girl. And if Niccolo Machiavelli were alive today, he would have rewritten “The Prince” and incorporated in it some of the things Gloria has done.

The question is: Is she going to put into play a NO-PROC scenario? Gloria has a penchant for pushing her luck too far. But this is one scenario that could unleash a backlash against her. A NO-PROC scenario would not be seen as just against Noynoy, it would be construed as against the Filipino people. The people have spoken — loud and clear — in the last elections and any attempt to extinguish their hopes and desire for change would be the ultimate betrayal which could ignite a “people power” revolution that would make EDSA 1 and EDSA 2 look like fire drills.

If Gloria wants history to treat her with some kindness, she should take a graceful bow when the final curtain falls.

(PerryDiaz@gmail.com)

Aquino on Trillanes, Lacson, Kris, GMA, Corona, Merceditas Gutierrez etc.

by Ellen Tordesillas

Rough transcript of President-apparent Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino, III presscon during a party for the media that covered the Liberal party during last election’s campaign Thursday May 20, held at a supporter’s place on Samar Avenue, Q.C.

Since the tape recorders were near Aquino , not the reporters, the questions were not clearly audible.

Nevertheless, the answers are more important.What I find significant is his answer to question number 44. He spoke about the injustice of Trillanes’ seven year imprisonment. He said he believes it was not a coup.

The coup detat case against the Magdalo officers , which is being tried by Judge Oscar Pimentel of the Makati Trial Court Branch 148 is up for promulgation.

Aquino said, “Can I just go back and give another example. Isang sa korte rin na gusto ko ipa-review talaga ang kaso ni Danny Lim at Sen. Trillanes. Ulitin ko,fundamental ang issue ko dito sa Revised Penal Code. Nakalimutan ko provision. I think, coup d’etat how committed, swift violent attack on military camps, utilities, telecoms, etc. Walang hotel. Ang issue po Oakwood. So di dapat lumampas sa fiscal na mali ang kaso. Pero lumabas sa piskal umabot sa korte nakakulong 7 taon ang dalawa sa kasong yan.

“At ang decision executive lang yan kailangan manifestation at petition before the RTC in Makati before it can effect, rectify this travesty of justice . They might have other cases but as far as I am concerned coup d’etat basis of interpretation mukhang mali ang application of batas.”

The full transcript:

1. Q: What will you do with Merceditas Gutierrez

A: Napakaimportante ng Ombudsman sa hahabulin nating fight against hcorruption. May issue sa fertilizer gaano katagal para imbestigahan.Bakit ganyan katagal para umpisahan imbestigahin si G. Bolante.
Maraming narito pati testigo para umusad ang kaso. Ang fertilizer scam 2004 umpisa imbestigahan 2008. Di ko mabatid kung may kaso sa scam sa ngayon 2010 na

2. Q: May fixed term daw siya?

A: Yan debatable sa ngayon. May nagsabi in-occupy niya nalalabing term ng nagbitiw may nagsabi bago termino niya. Pero ulitin ko prioritynatin napakaimportante ng Ombudsman sa pagdisiplina lalo ng kawani ng gobyerno at kung ganoon ang istilo patagalan para imbestigahan problema yan. Talagang malaking balakid sa ating anti-corruption fight.

3. Q: Pakikipagusap sa kanya?

A: Kakausapin po, kakausapin. Kasama kausap pero sa ngayon pinaghahanda natin ang canvassing. Nag-aalala tayo sa mga sideshow tulad ng pagkuha ng PCOS machines na di pagmumula ng certificates of
canvass na basehan ng canvassing. Ano ang pakay sa pagkuha

4. Q: Are you telling her to…?

A: I am not telling her at the present time. I will have a dialog with her soon. And it is not yet my function to tell her what to do. We haven’t even finished the canvassing.

5. Q: Pero search committee

A: Yung search committee nagtatrabaho para punuin. Alam ninyo pupunuin ninyo automatic na appointed by the president, number 1. Pero pinare-review ko rin sa kanila midnight appointments. May provision sa Constitution Art VI Sec 14 na nagsasaad pwede i-review lalo ang temporary appointment. Ang problema riyan may 90 days taning. Pag ang search committee marami akong inatrasan ay (tinambakan ng) pangalan, wala silang gagawin kundi tumanggap ng resume at di magawa ang trabahong dapat gawin. At ang mapapahamak doon e pag tayo ang naupo ang pagtatrabaho dapat kasama mo Kabinete di mo natatapos.

So ako ay nakikiusap di sa nililihim namin sila pero importante magtrabaho at hindi siyempre ma-object na kung sinu-sino sa media lahat na naghahanap ng pwesto etc

6. Q: Criteria na sundin

A: No. 1 siyempre dapat pareho ang pananaw natin ano ang dapat mangyari sa bayan natin. Kung ang dadalhin nito maling palakad ng ating kinalaban walang mangyayari sa atin. The first criteria has to be sharing the vision of what should be done in this country.

7. Q: Search committee members also qualified to hold Cabinet position?

A: Several of them are people I have really been thinking as the right persons for particular departments and agencies of government. They constitute the people who have my highest trust at this point in time.

8. Q: How are you dealing with factions?

A: I put my foot down. That does not help anything. Ang totoo nito siguro huwag natin kalimutan kami siguro pinaka di monolithic organization. People’s campaign ito, napakaraming samutsaring mga ideology mga samahan mga pinagmulan pinagdadaanan na nagkabuo-buo na sa pagsulong ng kandidatura natin kontra sa maling pamamahala sa kasalukuyan. Iiral ang kanya-kanyang priorities may ecology ang priority may pag-reform ng military at pulis may reform ng judiciary.

Pero ang dulo niio lahat ay naghahangad at talagang tumaya magkaroon ng pagbabago so kung pareho ang pananaw, balikan ko pananaw ng lahat, ito ba importante yung kung sino sikat sino nakaangat? Sana maibahagi ko sa kanila, importante ang trabaho at resulta. Anim na taon di biro siyempre meron tayong grace period para mag-produce ng tangible results at ifo-focus ko lahat na sasama sa atin sa pananaw naimportante ilagay ang tamang priorities. Di pagwapuhan pagandahan. Ang priority kaisa-isa ang pinangako natin ang commitment natin magkatotoo.

9. Q: Whole nation watching Cabinet, will you appoint members of the Firm?

A: They are speculation at this point in time, presently I don’t think there is any member of the Firm that is already being eyed for a specific slot. Not that I have anything against them. You will be surprised at the position meron talagang new faces may young may old talagang sana may mix ng best and the brightest.

10. Q: Veering from Palace suggestion you should not appoint amoy-lupa

A: In the same token di naman ako pinapakinggan ginawa nila lahat na magagawa para apihin kami sa pagkatagal-tagal na panahon, wala ako obligasyon para pakinggan sila.

11. Q: Tumulong sa campaign, appoint them?

A: Marami doon may talent. At saka saan ba nagmula ito? Huwag natin kalimutan di sa lyamado kami sa pagpasok dito. Pagpasok masasabi nating may pagkasuntok sa buwan pero nagtiwala sila sinamahan tayo sa pananaw na pwede people will make a difference. Bakit kung may kakayanan bakit natin isasantabi dahil tumulong sila sa kampanya? Di ba parang tama nga ang pananaw nila tama ang kumilos nila,pinanindigan ang paniniwala nila bakit di natin bigyan na imbes ng batikos ng batikos e ngayon (may) purpose.

12. Q: Call made by Escudero, he was the one … if possible… of your mother…

A: I respect my kumpare’s advice but at the same time I think kailangan sa atin hanapin sino ang angkop at dib a di tayo automatic magkaroon ng bias against anybody. Sa anti-dynasty pinaliwanag ko noong araw pa kaagad kapangalan mo ang tao criminal ka o mali ginawa mo na di ka ina-accuse. Nanindigan kasama mo noong pinaguusapan magkaroon ng Martial Law kasama sa order of battle noong tapos sapakikibaka biglang sasabihin pupuwersa bakit anong ginawang mali kung sino man sila.

13. Q: Invited ba dito si Mar?

A: Ako imbitado di ako nagtanong sino sa invitation list pero my partner is presently out of town ang commitment namin bukas kausap namin ang ambassador ng US sasamahan niya ako harapin doon tapos malamang pupunta kami di ko pwede sabihin dahil security risk. May functions sa party hingi ng timeout kapiraso. So siya po ay naroon sa maayos na lugar.

14. Q: Saan kayo usap

A: Bukas balik trabaho.

15. Q: Kung di palarin si Mar may plano kayo for him?

A: Meron po. Again, yung kampanya ko di ko masasabing madali pero siguradong napadali dahil maayos ang partnership talagang hatian sa trabaho nagdamayan nagtulungan nag-unawaan ang point ng intrigang binato sa atin di kumagat sa ating dalawa. Ang kanyang galling pinagsama palagay ko naman mas malaki sa individual component.

16. Q: What position?

A: Hintayin natin 1 year. Kami nagkausap. This is whether he wins or doesn’t win meron kaming usapan. 6 years ang taning, mga 2 years bibigyan na grace period ng sambayanan para madama ang agbabagong gusto natin mangyari lahat. Kung 2 kami nagtatrabaho doon mas mabilis kesa nag-iisa.

17. Q: Agenda with US amba

A: Not sure what agenda is, preparing for all possible contingencies. We were asked, siya ang pupunta.

18. Q: Courtesy call?

A: There’s another head of state we’ll be meeting Saturday. Can I tell you about it… Not now. Several pero hindi… Nakiusap ako bumalik kaunti ang boses.

19. Q: Congratulatory?

A: At this point in time speculative yan. They set an appointment, I don’t know what the topic is. I have my staff prepare the necessary staff work.

20. Q: US ano nakikita ninyo direction?

A: America remains the biggest economy in the world. What happens in America’s economy impacts the rest of the world. They are still our biggest trading partner normally in the top 3 in the top slot. So weare job generation is the first platform things that will enhance job generation in this country our relationship where the biggest market in the world is accessible to us is our highest priority.

21. Q: Obama called you?

A: Di pa

22. Q: Accusations na dayaan

A: Kada election yan ang litanya. Pero at the same time ngayon lang siguro na sinasabi ng akusasyong nabasa ko sa dyaryo 2 member ng opposition ang may pakana ng pandaraya. Ako ikaw kasama ko … ang dami nating hinihingi na parehas ang laban. Kay Acosta di nangyari. Si Acosta nakatanggap ng mas maraming boto sa nagpatuloy na kandidato.

Tanda lang na may kaunting confusion na pwede wala kung tinama nila ang kandidato sa balota. Tapos kami pa, ako raw nakinabang pero walang akusasyon ako kausap kung sinuman. At si Teddy Boy Locsin yata nagsabi Comelec nagtatanong din ang dali magparatang pwede ilagay kung actually ano actually ang pinaparatang. Kaya may sympathy ako di ko di pinapabor sarili ko pero kailangan pinaratngan ng kampanya, lolo anong ginawa niya? Basta. E di pwede ang basta..

23. Q: Walang fear ma-delay ang proclamation?

A: Susundan natin ang batas ang payo sa ating mga abogado ang pinagbasehan ang provincial certificate of canvass, di ang makina. So ang tanong dito sabi ni JPE among other legal luminaries, kung may issue dalhin mo sa electoral tribunal. So yung dito ba gusto bigyan ng agam-agam ang kababayan natin, gusto mo ba bigyan ng kaba. E sana hindi ho. Sana maski ang ginawa ng tao pwedeng itama pa. Alam ninyo biktima tayo ng makinang palpak. Yung masakit ang dami reserve na makina wala yata sa Tarlac kaya … Tapos siguro later on baka mas improved ang technology natin.

24. Q: (inaudible)A: Maganda tanungin natin ang babalik sa Senado. Baka sabihin nakikialam tayo. Dapat naman galangin ang maraming babalik doon.

25. Q: House Speakership

A: Again I will leave it up to my allies and those who are aligning themselves with us. Noong tinanong ko sa ibang kasama sa alyansa sa House

26. Q: Confident kayo maraming sasama sa LP

A: Confident ako dahil alam ko ang sasama.

27. Q: Zubiri pahiwatig aalis Lakas, will you take him in?

A: I cannot speculate on that I don’t think he has applied. And I am not the party, the party is precisely decides on a consensus basis. I will not be presumptuous to dictate on anybody because I don’t want to be dictated on also.

28. Q: Decision ni Kris umalis sa showbiz talk show, family decision ba?

A: She wants to embark on different directions in her career path. So abangan natin para sinuman may interest gusto i-pursue, I think still in showbiz.

29. Q: Talk shows aalis

A: She’s not going to be the first… Binanggit lang kung niya anong gusto nila gawin sa career path niya.

30. Q: para di masyado maging controversial?

A: Masyadong matagal na siya sa mundong yan palagay ko di yan ang issue. Meron ba kayong mga kasamahan, na been there and done that. E sa kanya rin yata medyo umabot sa, I have been doing this and she wants to try something else. Ok yan, she has more time for her children. Malaki na si Joshua mahirap pag niyaya ako, kinaladkad ako sa podium noong isang araw.

31. Q: Kung di si Kris sino tatayo First lady?

A: Huwag muna natin pagusapan pinagusapan ko kapatid ko may kontrata kami pag proclamation balik sila sa kani-kanilang buhay. Kasi talagang ang pinagmulan pareho kaming pumanaw nanay namin diretso dito grabe ang stress sa decision making time grabe ang kampanya wala akong pause.

di naman sa … pwede ba di kami makita ng publiko mahiya naman ako, di natin pagusapan baka makumbinsi ko sila from time to time. Ngayon kasi meron ako 2 imbitasyon tumayong ninong sa kasal nakiusap ako volunteer na lang si Asec Rey Marfil may asawa di subject sa pamahiin. Ang isa insisting pagpili ko maging abay ako sa kasal nila dahil may balak ako makasal.

32. Q: Inspring magkaroon ng asawa

A: Oo pero at the same time cognizant kayo kung nagkamali ng decision napakalaking bigatin yan, di naman sinasabing may nagpayo dito sa likod ko. Di ko sinasabi yan.

33. Q: Transition sino kumakausap sa inyo sa Malacañang?

A: For instance I understand nagkaroon ng invitation sa briefing sa peace process. I asked Ging Deles who was part of the peace panel to be the one to accept the briefing. Sa transition team we are still in the search committee phase. I think it’s better and more proper to finish the canvass before embarking on a transition dialog.

34. Q: Confirmed lumabas Jojo Ochoa

A: May party tayo ngayon.

35. Q: Jojo Ochoa’s role

A: Jojo Ochoa has been my principal legal counsel from the time I entered public service in 1998 and yung if ever I stated a position with regards to the law at the most debatable, I don’t think I have ever been proven wrong in the position I took. And I have to credit him with a lot of sound advice. He and his firms yung may partnership siya dati may bagong partnership siya ngayon. Until the work of the transition period is done, tinutulungan niya ako tapos kapalit doon sila puputaktihin ng kaliwa’t kanan hingi ng basbas. Mahiya naman ako sa kanila. Wala naman compensation ang search committee Even reimbursement of expenses…

36. Q: ES?

A: Can I just tell you at the time they finish the work?

37. Q: Consulted several legal issue include CJ issue?

A: By the time the CJ issue came in they were one of the groups we consulted there were so many lawyers’ groups.

38. Q: Stand niya the same with yours?

A: Let me put it this way. Fr. Bernas and I understand CJ Davide both agreed with my interpretation of Art VII Sec 15 on the ban on appointments and they were part of the Concon. In America the debate centers on what the founding fathers’ intentions. In this country since we have a relatively new Constitution we have people who actually participated in debates available to the SC so they can discern completely what the intentions of the framers of the Constitution.

39. Q: How avoid consti crisis if you won’t recognize Corona?

A: Gumagawa ng gulo ang ibang quarters, recognizing. Let’s face it. The Constitution recognizes the SC as the final arbiter of every question with regards to the Constitution. Yung point something as trivial as not going by tradition … but at the end of the day so long as the SC stays that way the decisions become part of the law of the land. As Chief Executive I have to … But that does not mean na forever after.

40. Q: CJ is only one sa SC

A: Ang crisis kasi pinipicture mag-decision ang SC siguro something like what Lincoln said to the Civil War in the US he decided to enforce it, di ko binabalak yan. Pero ang totoo noon kung palagay ko sa aking pananaw ang daming interpretation ang hirap unawain kailangan natin subukin i-rectify ito. Again this is something potentially very problematic, magkakaroon tayo election 2013, may redistricting, dati may criteria fixed criteria population 250k ang isa medyo malleable criteria contiguous as far as practicable. So di naman absolute rule yan. Tinanggal mo ang criteria ng population meron pang syudad meron pang probinsya. Kung di 250k di clear sa decision kung nagbago sila ng criteria ang lumabas wala. So kung may bumukod na 10k anong argument agains it pag may bumukod 180k… anong distrito gagawin mo ako bamaobliga mo veto kaliwa’t kanan paano kung naging 3000 member ng House basta merong isang tumatayo doon gawa tayo bagong distrito, yan ang minana ko ibig sabhin tiisin ko panindigan ko forever after meron tayong checks and balances sa Constitution.

41. Q: Sabi JPE next step SPML pauwi?

A: Like any other citizen he can expect the rule of law will be religiously observed. Wala akong papaboran walang aapihin. So kung ano ang kanyang karapatan talagang mapapangibabaw yan.

42. Q: Sabi Tañada uuwi Sen. Lacson after June 30?

A: Siya dapat kausapin na-contact ni JPE si Congressman Tañada.

43. Q: May pending AW, dalhin siya sa kulungan?

A: Pag di binawi ng korte na nag-issue ng AW kailangan i-serve yan. It is already the judiciary as far as I know. So babalik tayo doon. If you are asking me will I not follow it I’ll be in violation of the law.

44. Q: Baka raw parang… sumunod…

A: Noong nagumpisa ang kampanya wala si Sen. Lacson dito. Can I just go back and give another example. Isang sa korte rin na gusto ko ipa-review talaga ang kaso ni Danny Lim at Sen. Trillanes. Ulitin ko, fundamental ang issue ko dito sa Revised Penal Code kalimutan ko provision, I think. Coup d’etat how committed, swift violent attack on military camps, utilities, telecoms, etc. Walang hotel. Ang issue po Oakwood. So di dapat lumampas sa fiscal na mali ang kaso. Pero lumabas sa piskal umabot sa korte nakakulong 7 taon ang dalawa sa kasong yan.

At ang decision executive lag yan kailangan manifestation at petition before the RTC in Makati before it can effect, rectify this travesty of justice . They might have other cases but as far as I am concerned coup d’etat basis of interpretation mukhang mali ang application of batas.

45. Q: Oath taking

A: Sa totoo lang tinutukan natin ang canvassing lalo na dito sa recall ng 76,000 plus machines. Parang wala doon sa trabaho ng canvassers yan kaya din a ginawang oversight. Retrieve all the CF cards, di mo alam kung yung ginamit at binawi e ilang libo na naman yan. Baka sa susunod may mag-isip hanapin ang UV scanners check the serial numbers.

46. Q: Corona sarado isipan?

A: Palagay ko talagang mahirap i-justify magkakaroon ng … yung ganyang appointment under cloud of suspicion. I really think at some future time this decision will be revisited and it will be reversed.

We’ll go back to the Narvasa ruling previously. Ang haba ng jurisprudence panahon ni Macapagal uphold di pwede. Dumating 2 RTC panahon ni CJ Narvasa di pwede. Ito bigla pwede CJ. Ang RTC mas mababadi pwede. Paano ang CJ? So doon sa period nga dapat yung at huwag natin kalimutan nagkaroon tayo ng election May 10, May 10 may bagong hinalal di ko sinasabing ako yan. May bagong hinalal lumipat angmandato. Kailan ang vacancy, May 17. So sa delicadeza aspect na lang nailipat ng taumbayan sa iba ang kapangyarihan na pagdesisyon.

Sa ngayon ako sumumpa sa palagay ko di tama, darating ang punto kung ako manumpa may question na rin sa pagsumpa. So ganoon tayo may tradition may precedence na di kailangan ang CJ.

47. Q: Walang nadagdag kay Soliman sa Cabinet?

A: Ang iba di akalain aalukin ko. So talagang nag-aayos ng lahat sa kanyang pinagmumulan. May responsibilidad na di pwedeng nariyan na kayo bahala kayo. May talagang magaling na tinatanong ko e physically di healthy. Sayang pinakamagaling pa.

48. Q: Wala na sa Firm ia-appoint?

A: Mahirap magsalita nang sarado. Merong nanindigan din naman noon.

49. Q: Hyatt 10?

A: Si Ging pinakiusapan ko sa peace process. Di ko pa nakausap si Ging, ayoko sabihin natanggap niya di ko pa nakausap pero at least sa briefing ng status ng peace process e maganda na nauna siya siya magbriefing sa amin.

50. Q: Abad?A: Doon sa ano muna

51. Q: Kinakausap mo ba mga factions?

A: Marami akong, di ganoon karami pero nagkaroon ako ng pagkakataon babalik ko lang. Bakit ba tayo nakatutok diyan? Ano ba pakinabang ng sabungan na ito? Ano ba value ng pakikinig sa intriga? As opposed to,kanina may nag-text sa akin kaibigan ko sa media sabi niya sa akin ang daming problemang haharapin. Sabi ko sa kanya kaya ako hesitant na candidate. Sabi niya huli na para bawiin mo ikaw na. So again palagay ko mas tama ang pananaw niya sa akin. Marami tayong haharapin kailangan umpisahin pagaayos niyan ngayon pa lang na di pa natin responsibilidad kung umaasa tayo mabigyan natin ng kalutasan ang marami sa mga problemang haharapin. Lahat na nag-aaksaya ng oras nagbabangayan siguro di ko pareho pananaw kung anong dapat gawin paano kami magtatrabaho magkasama?

52. Q: Agencies na dapat (alisin)

A: Meron pero di ko muna sasabihin ngayon. For instance tinatanong ang NFA may value ba … ang supply natin … Is there another way …mechanism? Meron tayong interest na kung pwedeng … Noong kampanya binanggit ko TESDA at DepEd dapat para sa … Yung TESDA papasok bibigay ng kurso kung high school gusto tapusin may marketable skill ang bata di parang 3e kingdom bajala lahat saan direction…

53. Q: EO 464

A: Binawi ni Gng. Arroyo in fairness to her at MC108, binawi na rin yata.

54. Q: Assurance kayo di maulit?

A: Kami ang nabiktima noon ang laki ng … di mabiktima. I don’t subscribe to the idea na ZTE si Neri sabi sinuhulan ako ni, at sinabihan niya si Gng. Arroyo di pwede summon si Gng. Arroyo dahil co-equal di pwede summon si Neri dahil executive privilege. Dadalawang part ng conversation di pwede makausap. Paano nangyari sa pagimbestiga, wala. Di tayo papayag niyan.

Pero at the same time pinanggalingan natin legislature napakarami kung minsan ang tindi ng grandstanding ang tindi ng pag-api sa nai-implicate. Tayo hahabol maging reasonable all sides, bigyan ng dignidad galangin karpaatan ng lahat bakit kailangan magbangayan at himukin ko lahat na sangay nggobyerno 6 years matindi inaasahan ng taumbayan walang oras para …ang oras natin i-actualize ang dapat gawin.

55. Q: Gun ban

A: Approach ko muna sa inyo sa logic. Sino ang sa studies ko kung di ako nagkakamali less thasn 1% ang crimes using guns attributable to licensed firearms. So gun ban is a law that says you cannot bring yourfirearm outside your residence. Who will follow that? People who are law-abiding. So sino tina-target nating criminal? By definition outside the law. Gagawa ka ng batas sa isang tao talagang ayaw sumunod sa batas tapos expect natin maayos ang problema dahil may batas tayo,illogical yan. Pero yung things like more rigid enforcement of the law. Yung baril na pumasok dito may serial number maski binura malalaman saan bansa ginawa, kanino pinadala, mate-trace… maski ang maabswelto ka sa criminal liability may civil liability. Possession mo wala sa yo di mo report nang tama may kaso so bakit di kasuhan ang nagpaspok illegally bakit di kasuhan ang nagbenta illegally? Sino nag-shortcut sa process? Ang ganda pakinggan, gun ban walang magdadala ng baril. Kung may mangyari. Pero ang totoo niyan palagay ko tingnan ninyo sa statement least violent election since 2007 ang problema 2007 was the last election we had. Paano kung umatras pa?

May batas ka pasusunurin mo ang sumusunod ng batas. Pero ang problema nagmumula sa ayaw sumunod. 1% attributable to licensed firearms so ang matatangggal mo ng krimen 1%, paanop ang 99%

56. Q: Courtesy resignation Verzosa

A: Si Gen. Verzosa walang ginawa siyang mali may ilang buwan nalalabi bago age 56, meron siyang pagkakataon ma-actualize ang planong ginagawa niya. At sa panahon di siya ima-micromanage parang bypassed na siya katagal-tagal ng mga nakaupo ngayon made-demonstrate ang kakayahan niya at fitting nay an ang maging legacy niya.

57. Q: Extend

A: He has up to December when he turns 56

58. Q: AFP CS should also submit courtesy resignation?

A: Di nga nag-submit … I guess that’s debatable. I understand several, the CPNP is subject to onfirmation the AFP is subject from colonel up and the people who are holding positions right now did not get a confirmation of the CA.

59. Q: Sabi ni Lacierda di mo na option mag-oath sa bgy captain

A: Kung titingnan mo sa Local Government Code enumerate ang powers and responsibilities wala doon ang authority. However we are being pointed to Batas Pambansa. And I have yet to ask my lawyers to go through.

Although sa akin symbolically ang unity between the smallest basic unit natin ang barangay and the head of the national government naman,there is so much symbolism in having that done. But of course we will conform to whatever the law states.

60. Q: Kung di pwede talaga bgy captain ok lang AJ ng SC?

A: The one who voted against the CJ issue the lone dissenter.

61. Q: Nachura?

A: Hindi, Nachura and Velasco voted premature. The lady justice (Conchita) Morales, the lone oppositor.

62. Q: You might choose between them

A: Between them, I am inclined to … if she will accept it. Pareho ang pananaw namin pwede ko i… ang position. Sorry uulutin ko, Sec. 15 banned from making any appointments 2 months prior to the end of the term except in emergency situation in the executive department. Di ko maintindihan ang CJ is judiciary at hindi temporary.

63. Q: Turnover ng power ihahatid ka sa dambana, willing to be brought in by PGMA

A: Kung gusto po niya I won’t impose it on her.

64. Q: Sasakay sa sasakyan

A: Ilang minuto lang yan siguro … kung sa bandang SLEX mag-o-object na ako. Naging teacher ko naman yan nakakatanda sa akin.

65. Q: Softened up ka sa kanya?

A: Teka muna sakay kanina ngayon…

66. Q: You softened up?

A: Not that I’ve softened but I really, I am really committed to No. 1 setting up a mechanism where we have closure of everything. That’s why you find the question of Ombudsman so important. And then ang judicial reform also will be the stick we will wield on everybody past and present and hopefully in the future. And we want to … tinuruan ako kasi galangin ninyo ang nakakatanda, kababaihan pa. Pag kinausap ko tatalikuran ko, di yata tumutupad sa pinangako sa magulang sundin ang tama. Gusto ko ba siya pakinggan, ibang usapan yan. Ako inaatasan ngpamillya na humarap sa kanya noong burol ng aking ina. Meron tayong convention na dapat recognize.

67. Q: Will you still say good riddance to her.

A: Well di ba ang gusto ko sabihin at ang pwede ko sabihin magkaiba yan. Ulitin ko di fair … sa babae, ang tatay ko pag tinaasan ka ng boses ng babae noong bata kami di ka pwede sumagot. At kung sumagot ka batang musmos nababatukan ako kaya talagang damang dama ko ang leksyon na yan. So hanggang ngayon nakakatanda siya sa akin member siya ng kababaihan pag nagdebate kami huwag kalimutan ang paggalang sa kanyang estado

68. Q: Kasama siya…

A: Ang paggalang pero meron akong …

69. Q: Time magazine ka na naman

A: Kapiraso tinawag pa kaming dynasty at iba ang author. Ang dynasty can I … ito sa dynasty tatay ko 83 natapos nanay ko 92 pumasok ako 98 paano ako napasok sa dynasty? Political dynasty…Round 2

70. Q: Pagupit ka sa mall

A: Pag nakita ko kayo…

71. Q: Di reklamo security mo?

A: 1 p.m. lunch ang tao kaunti ang tao… palabas napakarami nila.Tataka ako sa bintana, normal na nakikita nila maawa ka salamin ito medyo manipis kung nabasag.

72. Q: Shalani nagkita kayo

A: (did not answer)

73. Q: Tumawag na ba

A: Kasama physical therapy ginawa ko yan… 6 months time 2 months time…

74. Q: Checkup

A: … tapos na pero since nakita ko baka bukas meron na naman

Thailand on my mind

by Rey O. Arcilla
from MALAYA

‘Of the seven countries where I served as a foreign service officer, Thailand is closest to my heart.’

YOU cannot right a wrong with another wrong.

The Supreme Court decision allowing Ms. Gloria Arroyo to name a Chief Justice to replace retired Reynato Puno, in my view, was wrong. It violated Section 15, Article VII of the Constitution.

Now, many are urging President-to-be Noynoy Aquino to take his oath before the just-appointed replacement of Puno, Renato Corona. That would be tantamount to giving his own stamp of approval to the infirm Supreme Court decision.

As I said, Noynoy strikes me as a man with a keen sense of what’s right and wrong. He will not be a party to something that is obviously wrong. It is nothing personal against Corona. I’m sure even Corona appreciates that.
Noynoy’s apparent decision to take his oath before the lone dissenter in the Supreme Court decision merely affirms his position on the matter. At the same time, it signals his intention to respect the Supreme Court as an institution.

Case closed.

***

Ms. Arroyo and her future ex-Foreign Secretary Alberto Romulo seem determined to exact their toll on people’s money up to the last minute.
Arroyo is now reportedly going to Shanghai to visit the World Expo. What for? She can go there after June 30. (It’s a good thing she has decided not to proceed to Vietnam, contrary to what her executive secretary announced last week.)

Romulo, on the other hand, went to Tajikistan last week ostensibly to attend the meeting of the Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC), together with Undersecretary for Special Concerns Rafael Seguis.

Curiously, Romulo did not even stay in Dushanbe, Tajikistan’s capital, for the duration of the meeting. He suddenly returned to Manila for reasons unknown. If that is not wasting people’s money, I don’t know what is.

At least in the case of Seguis who has done much traveling himself (he is probably the only one who can match or even surpass Romulo’s record), most of his foreign trips were necessitated by his difficult role as head of the government peace panel negotiating with the MILF rebel group and anchor of the Philippine bid to become an OIC observer. Sadly, he has achieved nothing conclusive so far in both fronts.

To be fair to him, however, it is not for lack of trying that he hasn’t achieved the hoped-for results in the negotiations with the MILF. (The OIC bid is another story that will need re-telling at another time.) He is working under very serious constraints, not the least of which is his mandate to work only within bounds allowed by the Constitution. The MILF, on the other hand, has made it clear that it is not their Constitution and that therefore they would not negotiate within its limits.

That biggest of hurdles will have to be ironed out first before the Noynoy administration embarks on serious negotiations with the MILF.

***

Arroyo’s feeble finance secretary, Margarito Teves, is at it again. He insists on selling the valuable government shares in the Malampaya natural gas project, against the recommendation of the PNOC-EC board. Is he not aware of the ban on midnight sale of government assets?

And then the man who, among other things, has been dragging his feet on the much-awaited implementing rules of the Revised Senior Citizens Act, is now advocating the increase of the value added tax from 12 to 15 percent. I hope he is not merely echoing the IMF stand.

Teves said both measures are necessary to reduce the expected budget deficit of close to P300 million. Whose fault was it that the deficit ballooned to such a huge sum in the first place?

***

Of the seven countries in three continents where I served as a foreign service officer, Thailand is closest to my heart. It’s like a second home to me.

I was first posted in Thailand in mid-1966 as a staff employee in our embassy and later as Third Secretary and Vice Consul after I passed the Foreign Service Officer examination. The last two of my four children were born in Bangkok. By the time we left for home assignment eight years later, I had made so many friends in both the Thai public and private sectors. (I returned twenty years later as ambassador and made more friends.)

The incumbent foreign minister, Khun Kasit Piromya, was a friend and contemporary, as were two of his distinguished predecessors – Khun Nitya Pibulsonggram and Khun Tej Bunag. Tej is now the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Asian Institute of Technology in Bangkok. I was once a member of that board.

Another close friend, Khun Birabhongse Kasemsri (now deceased), became Private Secretary to His Majesty the King. The present Private Secretary, Khun Arsa Sarasin, is also a friend. Another friend, Khun Thep Devakul, is now a member of the Privy Council.

The current Governor of Bangkok, Khun Sukhumband Paribatra, a former Vice Minister for Foreign Affairs, is also a friend. He was responsible for bringing to reality my proposal to have the street next to the Philippine Embassy named “Soi (street) Philippines”. As far as I know, it is the only street in Thailand named after a foreign country. In reciprocity, Rada Street in Makati was also named Thailand Street.

(Incidentally, the black marble marker chronicling the history of the naming of the street after the Philippines disappeared sometime after the incumbent ambassador, Antonio Rodriguez, assumed his post some seven years ago. He has since restored it but in a place where nobody can see it. It is my intention to unravel the “mystery” behind the temporary disappearance of the historical marker at the appropriate time. Meanwhile, the incoming ambassador, Linglingay Lacanlale, has promised to restore the marker to a place where it can be read by passersby.)

There are other enduring friendships I have maintained. To name a few: Thanpuying Chanut Piyaoui (chairman emeritus), her son Khun Chanin and Khun Kampi of Dusit Thani Hotel; Khun Chali Sophonpanich and Khun Chaisak of Bangkok Bank; Khun Yotin, a real estate mogul; Khun Sarun, Khun Artasith, Khun Thawansak, Khun Siripong, Khun Wisan, Khun Sukanya, all of Petroleum Authority of Thailand; and the twin brothers Khun Pornchai and Khun Narong who are in the real estate and hotel businesses.

There are also Filipino friends who have adopted Thai citizenship: Mar Samaniego, Ric Velasquez, Jess Ballesteros, Nick Sucharitaves, Tony Aguilar and Rudy Columbres.

It wasn’t, therefore, for lack of concern that I didn’t touch on the situation in Bangkok during the last two months. I simply kept hoping it would not last as long as it did and certainly not end in such a tragic manner.

It is my fervent wish that the country’s leaders and its people will now be able to sort out their differences in a peaceful and harmonious fashion to prevent similar situations in the future.

***

US Ambassador Harry Thomas Jr. called on Noynoy after which the latter said the relations between the two countries will be better.

I will not second guess what he meant by that. But I am sure he is aware of the provision in the 1987 Constitution which specifically states that the country must have an independent foreign policy. He must also be aware that that provision got in there because of the US role in prolonging the dictatorial rule of President Ferdinand Marcos.

***

There are 36 days left before the end on 30 June 2010 of the stolen presidency of Ms. Arroyo, courtesy of “Garci”, et al.

“… And so I face the final curtain….”

***

Today is the 27th day of the fourth year of Jonas Burgos’ disappearance.
Readers have asked when I would end this “reminder” on Jonas’ disappearance. My answer: Until his case is resolved to the satisfaction of his family.

***

Email: roacrosshairs@yahoo.com

Public Opinion and the Credibility-challenged Supreme Court

No Limitations
by Ted Laguatan, Esq.

No need to waste good ink doing further in depth analysis of the Supreme Court’s recent decision allowing outgoing president Gloria Macapagal Arroyo to “midnight appoint” the next Supreme Court Justice. Article VII Section 15 clearly states without any ambiguity or vagueness that she cannot. There are enough legal scholars and academicians who are familiar with the legislative history of this particular provision including one of the Constitutional delegates who actually drafted this particular provision – who have repeatedly affirmed publicly that the constitutional prohibition is absolute. There are no exceptions. If there were exceptions – these would have been specified in the provision. There should not even have been a debate on this issue.

Eminent Constitution Professor Fr. Joaquin Bernas, SJ., a Jesuit priest, lawyer, former Dean of Ateneo University Law School and a delegate in the 1987 Constitutional Convention -has repeatedly affirmed in public interviews that the Constitution prohibition makes no exceptions. “The prohibition also covers appointments in the judiciary.” affirms Bernas. More than the other delegates, Bernas has more authority to say what this provision exactly means because he was involved in drafting it.

In determining the actual meaning of this provision – the justices did not even consider in depth the opinions of Bernas and other constitutional delegates which would have been primary sources to arrive at the truth. Christian Monsod, another delegate agrees with Bernas’ assertion.

No one is above the Constitution which is the basic law of the land – not the President, not Congress, not the Supreme Court. The “Arroyo can appoint” Justices placed themselves above the Constitution when they made this ruling.

No amount of convoluted legal arguments by twelve black robed figures sitting on high chairs or by Arroyo apologists – can persuade the public that the Justices were in good faith when they made this decision or that Arroyo rushed the appointment of her former lawyer Renato Corona as Chief Justice – “for the good of the country.” They cannot defend the indefensible.

The issue here is not so much a legal issue – but a moral issue. Stated succinctly: Is it moral for the Supreme Court Justices to place their appointer Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s interest above that of the people and the Constitution which they are sworn to serve?

Being highly trained lawyers – they could cleverly elude the question and ask: “What’s moral? Define moral?” That answer is not so different from Pilate’s response to Jesus: “Truth? What is truth?”

The truth is that the Justices are already condemned by public opinion and will continue to be so condemned by history.

Their only salvation is to do the right thing. It’s not too late. On their own motion, they can vacate their judgment (a procedural device used by American courts to correct errors or to overturn previous decisions). In principle, the court has inherent powers to correct itself and should be given such powers because even justices are human and can err. However it would take much courage and humility for the Justices to do this correction. I hope for the sake of the country that they do.

I never lose hope in human beings – that the sacred within all of us can sometimes prevail even under very difficult circumstances. I can only sympathize with the Justices as to the pressures they must have faced when this important decision was made. I will not demonize them because they are not demons and can be honorable men under different circumstances.

However, the importance of correcting this inappropriate decision cannot be overemphasized.

I disagree with Fr. Bernas’ well meant recent statement saying that President elect Noynoy Aquino should just take his oath before Chief Justice Renato Corona who hopefully might prove himself later to be independent – to avoid a “Constitutional crisis”. The country is already in crisis as it is because of a Supreme Court that declares itself above the Constitution by giving it an interpretation that clearly was never meant by the framers.

The issue here is not even Corona. The issue here is that if this Arroyo Supreme Court is allowed to place itself above the Constitution – above the law – it sets a very bad precedent. It gives the message that yes – the Supreme Court can do anything it wants. All that it has to do is interpret the laws according to its own unbridled discretion – without accountability to anyone. Nothing then prevents this Court and subsequent Supreme Courts to continue abusing their power because this decision shows they can get away with it. The people should not allow it and take a strong position in condemning this anomalous decision.

President-elect Noynoy is wisely advised to take his oath of office before Justice Conchita Carpio Morales – the lone dissenter among the justices – she with the most balls.

By so doing, Aquino shows that he does not disrespect the Supreme Court as an institution but only disrespects its immoral decision – which every man and woman of conscience should do.

—————–o—————

Atty. Laguatan’s legal expertise is officially certified by the California State Bar. He does immigration, personal injury, wrongful death, medical malpractice and complex litigation. He is rated as among the top 5 percent best lawyers in America by a magazine for lawyers. For communications: 455 Hickey Blvd., Ste. 516, Daly City, CA 94015; 101 California St. Ste. 2450, San Francisco, California 94111; Tel. (650) 991-1154, Fax (650)991-1186, E-mail: laguatanlaw@gmail.com

The wisdom in the words of your enemies

AS I WRECK THIS CHAIR
by William M. Esposo
from The Philippine Star

In the 11th century kingdom of ancient Korea, an unlikely monarch was counseled by the Head Lama of the Buddhist Temple where he grew up and was educated. Not being in the line succession, the boy was assigned to the Buddhist monks so as not to be a threat to the rightful successor. 

However, two bad monarchs almost ended their dynasty and it eventually fell on the shoulders of the unlikely monarch to sit on the vacated throne. Before the young man’s departure for the palace in order to wear the crown, the Head Lama gave the future monarch this priceless advice — be very wary of the suggestions of friends and advisers but be always on the lookout for the wisdom in the words of your enemies.

It is easy to accept the wisdom in the first part of the Head Lama’s advice. History shows us how many monarchs were brought down by the bad advice of friends and advisers. However, the second part of the advice — to get the wisdom in the words of your enemies — seemed illogical. After all, an enemy is not inclined to provide the foe with wisdom and advantage. An enemy seeks to bring down the foe, not improve his chances of success.

Because this monarch ruled with wisdom, his reign was marked by a prolonged period of peace and prosperity. He was able to vanquish all their internal as well as external threats. Instead of ending, their dynasty lasted for three more generations.

What the Head Lama meant when he counseled the emerging monarch to get the wisdom in the words of an enemy is not to literally follow what the enemy proposes or demands but to detect in what the enemy says the way the enemy thinks, what the enemy really wants and what the enemy truly fears. When you’ve mastered how your enemy thinks, what your enemy really wants and what are your enemy’s greatest fears — then you’re on the way to predicting and controlling your enemy’s behavior.

In our local setting, a recent interview on ANC with Lakas Kampi CMD Party officer Prospero Pichay could provide incoming president Noynoy Aquino with invaluable insights as to how the soon-to-be opposition party thinks, what they want and what they fear most. In the said ANC interview, Pichay conveyed the following:

1. He claimed that their party will not impede the legislative agenda of the Aquino administration and that they will cooperate if the legislative agenda is good for the country.

2. Pichay also claimed that their party did not have any intention of impeaching soon-to-be president Noynoy Aquino.

3. Pichay explained that cooperation will be extremely difficult to arrange if the Aquino administration will prosecute Madame Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA).

Applying the advice of the wise Head Lama, this is how your Chair Wrecker would assess what Pichay was really saying, thinking and fearing. First of all, they do not want to be out of the loop. They would be happy to be in coalition with the new administration. Second point is this — contrary to what Pichay said, they know and will use their option to impeach if Aquino presents them the opportunity to do so. Lastly, no cooperation is possible if hostile acts are made against GMA.

Obviously, GMA still wields a lot of influence in the Lakas Kampi CMD Party for her personal protection to be considered a major consideration in a possible coalition with the incoming Aquino administration. How long her party mates will continue to protect her from possible prosecution remains to be seen. How loyal are these people she had trusted to be her allies? How much money is she ready to give to retain their loyalty?

This is not to suggest that Noynoy Aquino should rush to work out an accommodation with the Lakas Kampi CMD Party. One of the main points of his mandate is to right the wrongs of the past. The last thing Noynoy voters will want to see is a deal where GMA goes Scot-free in exchange for cooperation. Cooperation without justice will result in a massive erosion of Noynoy’s political base.

This Aquino presidency will be no different from that of Cory, his mother, which was a minefield from day 1. The coups may no longer be in fashion but ejection could be attained through other ways. Impeachment is a very real threat to the Noynoy Aquino administration and the process is legal and constitutional.

The election results show that Aquino’s Liberal Party is greatly outnumbered in both the House of Representatives and the Senate. Getting the numbers in order to place Sonny Belmonte as the Speaker of the House is easy. But when push comes to shove and Aquino’s political enemies close ranks, the 30% vote required to forward an impeachment complaint to the Senate can easily be attained. And in the Senate, the odds are even greater against Noynoy.

The last thing Noynoy needs in his administration are the bulls in the china shop, the likes of which also eroded the popularity of Cory during the first two years of her term. Noynoy must surround himself with people who can neutralize threats without compromising the ideals he stands for and people who will not create unnecessary enemies.

* * *

Chair Wrecker e-mail and website: macesposo@yahoo.com and www.chairwrecker.com