Chief Justice Renato Corona’s much-anticipated appearance in the Senate for his impeachment trial was met with, unsurprisingly, negative reactions and remarks. It was clear that the Filipino people are not interested in the very least to hear what the respondent had to say; they just wanted him to show up so they can ridicule him all the more. Despite what Filipinos everywhere said about demanding the truth from Corona’s mouth, they are not really after the truth; they are only after someone whom they can verbally beat up like a lingual punching bag. We are not a truth-based society; instead, we are a ridicule-based society, especially when people are convinced that, in repeatedly demeaning the respondent’s image, the truth is on their side.
To add insult to injury, Corona’s health just had to be compromised at the end of his testimony, and was subsequently given medical attention, later transferred to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of The Medical City hospital. Many Filipinos, mindful of the infamous ex-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s medical struggle, denounced Corona’s ordeal as a “drama†of some sort. I find this reasoning a bit suspect however, for the straightforward reason that as Chief Justice, Corona should know how his little “act†would turn out; horribly.
| SUPPORT INDEPENDENT SOCIAL COMMENTARY! Subscribe to our Substack community GRP Insider to receive by email our in-depth free weekly newsletter. Opt into a paid subscription and you'll get premium insider briefs and insights from us. Subscribe to our Substack newsletter, GRP Insider! Learn more |
First, Arroyo, whom many Filipinos passionately detest, was condemned especially when she appeared to be sick, her condition quickly judged as a “drama.†One would seriously think that if Corona intends to get away from everything through acting, he would be more creative than to act “sick†and instantly earn the ire of the Filipinos who simply can’t move on from the Arroyo incident. And yet he went sick.
Second, as Chief Justice, Corona would know very well the consequences of disrespecting the Senate, intentionally or not, by casually walking out without permission. Remember that Corona’s fate practically rests on the judgment of the senator-judges. As someone who wants to get acquitted, shouldn’t he be more prudent before getting on the wrong side of the judges, directly affecting his verdict?
And yet the chain of events took place all the same, and Corona clearly got the bad side of the Senate President, Juan Ponce Enrile, with the defense panel taking much of the blow. If the respondent intends to get away from all of this scot-free as many Filipinos allege, seriously one should consider that this is one ridiculous ploy, putting Corona in a more dangerous position despite his vast legal knowledge as Chief Justice?
Of course, these points are raised just in case Filipinos are not convinced of the fact that the doctors tending to Corona has already issued their statements regarding his condition.
Meanwhile, as Corona fights a new battle, lead defense lawyer Serafin Cuevas is keen on turning things around.
Chief Justice Renato Corona’s defense team is prepared to seek a mistrial should the verdict of the Senate impeachment court show “grave abuse of discretion.”
(Source: Link)
Determined to uphold the rule of law, Cuevas stated the following:
Asked if the Senate has already shown abuse of discretion, Cuevas said they would still review the case.
“Siyempre babasahin namin uli ‘yung [Of course we will still read the] transcript so … hindi naman lahat ng error ng court ay [not all the court’s errors are] grave abuse of discretion sufficient to raise the issue of mistrial,” he added.
“Grave abuse of discretion†is defined as follows:
The exercise of power in an arbitrary or despotic manner by reason of passion or personal hostility. Such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction. The abuse of discretion must be patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion or hostility.
(Source: Link)
A GR Post article in the past has explained the legitimacy of declaring a mistrial in the Chief Justice’s impeachment trial; namely, the grave misconduct of the prosecutors, but still the trial pressed on to satisfy the Filipinos’ insatiable vindictiveness. And now, we have another prospect of mistrial based on “grave abuse of discretion.†Whether this will be given due attention is yet to be known, but I can hazard a theory that can legitimize this assertion; this concerns the esteemed senator-judge Franklin Drilon.
Asked about Corona’s controversial challenge to him and the congressmen in the prosecution panel, Drilon made the following remarks:
“I will not fall into his trap. I will not go down to his level. He is pathetic! That is all part of his game-plan. It only shows that the Chief Justice has no intention to be cross-examined by the impeachment court, that he, after all, is insincere when he said he is willing to divulge all his bank accounts, including his dollar accounts. We are not the ones on trial. We are not the ones being tried at the impeachment court.â€
(Source: Link)
Feisty words by Drilon we have here, considering the fact that he is one of the people who are supposed to give Corona a well-thought, unbiased verdict. And as far as the definition of “grave abuse of discretion is concerned,†his actions are well within the book. The second sentence speaks quite well of him, given his utter… recklessness, wouldn’t you say?
Reasons for mistrial have been given throughout the course of the impeachment trial. Hopefully, people, especially the Senate, are prudent enough to give this a thought.
As to Corona’s controversial challenge, this concerns, of course, his “waiver.â€
“Chief Justice Renato Corona on Tuesday sprang a surprise on the Senate impeachment court by waiving the confidentiality of his local and dollar accounts in an emotional testimony, but on certain conditions.
At the end of his three-hour opening statement,†Corona signed in open court a draft waiving the confidentiality of his four dollar accounts, but challenged Senator Franklin Drilon, who has helped the prosecutors ferret out evidence against him from witnesses, and the 188 lawmaker-complainants to do the same.â€
(Source: Link)
While some agreed that it’s high time the government become more transparent, Corona’s dare was generally met with criticism from Filipinos, who are quick to argue that since he is the one on trial, he was being disrespectful for dragging the other members of the Senate court into the fray. But, wait a minute.
Filipinos assert that the impeachment of the Chief Justice is supposed to embody the sense of justice that they possess. In the course of the trial, this sense of justice consists mainly of forcing the respondent to disclose his assets, even in the presence of laws stating that certain assets may be opened with the owner’s permission. Other elements of this sense of justice also include misbehaving in the part of the prosecutors, magical fairies sending dubious evidences to people who wish to persecute the respondent, and bad accounting.
But Corona is giving the people what they want, in the spirit of liberality and justice. Corona not only signed his waiver authorizing government bodies to examine his accounts, he is also giving Filipinos the opportunity to check out the accounts of the other politicians by challenging them to sign their waivers too! But Corona was condemned, because he is allegedly doing this to maneuver his way to an acquittal, and because he is the only one on trial.
My daisies, what happened? What happened to the overly vindictive Filipinos who have no qualms with overriding the law just so they can smack a guilty verdict on Corona’s face? What happened to the Filipinos who disregard existing laws in the guise of “liberality� What made the Filipinos suddenly recognize the rule of law?
Oh, but of course… it’s because Corona is the one making the dare. Seriously, how can you accept the fact that the one you despise is the one giving you what you want most? We certainly cannot have that now, can we? And so the Filipinos suddenly switched on their “rule of law†button to continue demeaning the respondent. Yes, some sense of justice we have.
In many aspects, Corona’s dare was pretty nifty, hitting two birds with one stone. The first bird was the reputation of his persecutors. The second one was the hypocrisy of the Filipinos, attempting to uphold the rule of law only when it suits their egotistic purposes.
And so my musings on the events that transpired in the impeachment trial end. Whatever the verdict may be, this trial successfully showed the world a vivid glimpse into the deeper dysfunctions of the Filipino society.
Nice article, Arche! 🙂
Thanks very much, Mr. Hector Gamboa! 🙂
Good thing I am not the only who thinks that majority of the Filipinos were dysfunctional jerks.
I recalled last night an online buddy commented on a lampooned photoshopped image of Corona along with GMA “Those who didn’t committed sin cast the first stone.” I have just replied “Everyone is a jerk, they will all cast stones” complementing his remark.
Yep. In the process, everyone will be “stoned.”
Good one, Mercury. 😛
First of all, I want to say that I am not one of those partisan folks who lives inside a “bubble”. What I mean is that I am not about to say “to hell with Corona” or “Corona is innocent” regardless of the evidence simply because of my particular leanings.
At the onset, I believed that:
(1) it was disturbing to see the process of impeaching the CJ railroaded in the House of Representatives;
(2) the prosecution, particularly the congressmen (as opposed to private counsels), appeared to be highly incompetent;
(3) the prosecution appeared to be trying to fish for evidence that it didn’t appear it had.
Right up to the very end, I was on the fence because I was caught between the apparent strong evidence against Corona for the non-disclosure of his $ accounts and my belief that the Ombudsman did not have the authority to get the documents from AMLC without a court order.
I stayed awake on the day the CJ testified to listen to his testimony. I did my best to keep an open mind…avoiding any prejudgement of the case.
But after listening to the crux of his testimony – regarding the $ accounts, I have come to the conclusion that the CJ should be impeached.
Now, you and I have a different appreciation of the events, and I respect that. But here’s the gist of the reasons why I believe the CJ should be impeached:
1. He failed to disclose his $ accounts in his SALN. The confidentiality of $ deposits from my understanding of the law (I was a lawyer in Manila) refers to the revelation of “details” of the bank account (note – details of the bank account) unless a court orders its revelation. Details means one cannot be obligated to say how many accounts one has, the balance pertaining to each account, what banks are they located in, etc. The confidentiality refers to details of bank accounts. However, this does not mean that someone is exempt from stating the total amount (without the need to specify details pertaining to the bank account) in one’s SALN because clearly, one’s dollar account is part of one’s assets.
To me, both the letter and the spirit of the law of the FD Act did not intend this to mean that all dollar accounts need not be declared in the SALN. Because if someone concludes otherwise, this means that one can also argue that one need not declare one’s income in foreign currencies as part of one’s income tax return (and hence, can actually evade paying taxes).
In fact, to follow the CJ’s interpretation means that in the situation where all his peso income that he converts to US dollars need not be declared in the SALN. Which means that all officials can simply convert their money to a foreign currency and evade the intent and purpose of the SALN. There is something perverse and corrupt in the interpretation.
The CJ and his counsels have their interpretation favourable to their cause. I believe though that the CJ violated the letter and spirit of the FD law and the SALN law….and therefore should be impeached under the Second Article of Impeachment (non-inclusion of items in the SALN).
This will boil down to whether the senators believe that $ accounts need not be declared as part of one’s SALN.
2. Though not an item of the impeachment case, the demeanor of the CJ at the end of his testimony…leaving before he was excused (he should know the proper decorum in a court…in this case an impeachment court) shows that he will now lack the moral ascendancy to continue being the top justice of the land (which is supposed to be the last bastion of law and order in the Philippines). It was a clear defiance of the impeachment court. I tried to keep an open mind on the fact that he might have really been sick. But the evidence I have seen shows that this is a total lie.
(a) I have seen clearly on video the scene where the CJ leaves, joined by his wife, and 2 counsels shaking his hands before he steps out of the impeachment court. One of those shaking his hand was Atty. Judd Roy (who stands up, shakes the CJ hands, then sits). None of these lawyers seemed puzzled as to why the CJ was leaving and the CJ himself seemed steady and okay. Later, all these lawyers claimed that they were caught unaware of the CJ’s action and that the CJ told them that he was feeling unwell. The videos clearly show this was not the case.
(b) The testimony of the Sargent at Arms that when he requested the CJ to refrain from leaving, the CJ (who wasn’t about to collapse or anything) “looked directly into my eyes” of the SAA and said “are you going to arrest us?”…to which the CJ wife added “is this martial law?”).
Clearly, the CJ didn’t leave the court because he was feeling faint or about to collapse.
*******
I think it is highly unfair for you to lump all those who have legitimate views and who came to their own honest conclusion of the CJ’s testimony as part of a bunch of people who have made up their minds against Corona regardless of the evidence.
I know those people exist. But it goes both ways. There also people who hate Aquino so much that they are also willing to acquit Corona no matter what.
But there are also those who are genuinely trying their best to discern and not to fall into the trap of mob mentality that, with all due respect to you, permeates not only those who are pro-Aquino, no matter what, but also those who are anti-Aquino, no matter what.
In fact, many people, such as the IBP president (who actually felt that the impeachment case against Corona was a direct attack on the judiciary) and many deans of Philippine law schools and other schools (e.g., Dean La Vina of the Ateneo School of Government who said in the beginning that he will analyze the proceedings but will not render any kind of judgement) have all come out now to say that the CJ is guilty of Article II and that he lacks the moral ascendancy to continue as CJ. As to the IBP president, he said the CJ should be found guilty/resign if he does not show up for cross-examination on Friday. They all feel that the CJ actually did walk out and try to evade cross-examination.
Surely, you cannot say that these people are all part of the partisan group supporting Aquino that you seem to despise.
Honestly, I am willing to give the CJ one more chance….that chance will be during the cross-examination…if there will be one. I am willing to hear what he has to say. But absent a cross-examination, I will have to base my decision on what he had said in his testimony and as explained earlier, I believe his testimony in that regard is damning to his cause.
Sure, the CJ may be sick NOW. But clearly, he was not sick when he left the witness stand without being dismissed. As the chief magistrate, he should know that you do not leave the witness stand until the presiding judge lets you leave the stand.
*******
On a different matter:
I have expressed this sentiment several times already on this site. I noticed that the writers of GRP (some of them) appear to see things in black and white…that those who do not agree with them are all part of the “stupid Pinoys” or are Aquino trolls or are Noytards.
To think that way is, in my opinion, insulting to the intellect of some of your readers who have an independent mind, who try to avoid overly partisan rhetoric, and who genuinely try to keep an open mind when thinking about the major issues of the country.
I know there will be people who will hit me with one liners and accusations of partisanship. But to GRP readers who have a genuine desire for dialog, you will clearly see that I have done my best to articulate the reason why I think the CJ should be impeached. We may have a difference in opinion and appreciation of facts. But surely, you cannot accuse me of being one who has been intellectually dishonest and full of partisan crap in his search for the truth.
1. It’s your interpretation as a former lawyer of the FD Act. Obviously the current Chief Justice Corona got a different interpretation. It’s open for debate who is right.
From what I see, clearly, there is a need to sharpen the description to FD Act in correlation to SALN. (Violate the FD act you go to prison, violate the SALN you get impeached.)
Who says his foreign deposit isn’t taxed? Got any proof on that?
2. You must mean the misleading title from Rappler article where it is titled “IBP president: Corona should quit if…” (the “if…” part is hard too see in their website) to which many people would read that the IBP president wants Corona to quit. That is not what Roan Libarios exactly said. Rappler is caught again in mind conditioning and propaganda.
La Vina is Harvey Keh’s mentor. Keh was caught lying in the impeachment trial remember? How much credibility do you want to give to people like that?
I am giving benefit of the doubt that CJ Corona is indeed ill at that unfortunate moment. He is diabetic for 20 years and got a history of heart bypass. I can imagine the adrenaline rush preventing him to eat and sleep properly.
I will take your word that you do not have any partisanship (just as I take CJ Corona’s defense word that he is sick). But I do think you are a victim of the yellow media’s mind conditioning.
GRP writers are good at dialogs without relying to one liners. Most of their arguments have basis. You have no worry from them.
You are most welcome here. We, including me as a casual reader, would love to hear from people who have different viewpoints.
@Gregory Macaltao
Excuse me, but I do NOT recall seeing your comments before until today. Your statement “I have expressed this sentiment several times already” has no basis. I certainly would have taken note of your comment had it been this long and detailed. And please note that any comments made by other posers on the comment section of this blogsite does not necessarily reflect the views of the writers of GRP.
Just because you haven’t seen it doesn’t mean I haven’t done. Ask Fallen Angel….and I said something to a post of Benigno around 1 month ago….but it was a short reply.
That doesn’t equate to having “expressed this sentiment several times already”. Your statement was inaccurate. We do have regular trolls here who say the same things over and over. I would believe them if they say that they have expressed their sentiments several times already.
Besides, what you are saying now is something related to the recent developments so obviously you cannot say that you have “expressed this sentiment several times already”.
Anyways, I just hope you can stick to the issues next time and refrain from making side comments that distract all of us from the more important things.
@Gregory Macaltao
Well, Corona does have a solution to this dilemna. He invited the Cogressmen+Drilon to sign a waiver similar to what he signed authorizing the disclosure of his dollar accounts. According to Corona, if they do not sign the waiver allowing the disclosure of their own dollar accounts, then his interpretation of the dollar secrecy law will be proven correct – that they are not required by law to include their dollar accounts in their own SALN.
As for his alleged walk-out, as I’ve said in my recent article: To be fair, I can understand why some people are disappointed. Corona’s alleged walk-out from the courtroom was unexpected. It seemed like a sign that he was fed up with the Kangaroo Court. I can understand that too. If I were in his shoes, I would be mad at the Senator Judges of the impeachment court as well. Anyone with half a brain should have thrown the baseless and badly-written impeachment complaints filed by Congress out the window even before the trial started. It was probably obvious to Corona that some Senators tolerated the violations of the prosecution because they were allied with the Aquino government. How can you actually respect a court that you perceive to be too biased against you? Corona being only human can be forgiven for thinking that some of the Senator Judges were going to convict him no matter what he said or did anyway.
This part I do not understand. You recognise that:
But you cannot understand why Corona could be pissed off at the whole court for allowing the persecution to continue for months. In my opinion, if the Senator Judges convict him just because they felt “insulted”, then clearly, they need to work on their ego.
Thanks for sharing your insight, anyway.
Ilda i happened to see Sen Koko Pimentel at ANC Tv with Karen Davila Headstart program. Their topic was CJ Corona last testimony. The senator was asked by Karen about Bank Secrecy Law and SALN disclosures. To my understanding senator koko was amazed how CJ Corona interprets the Bank Secrecy Law, it should however “harmonize” with the SALN its because its all about Assets. Sen koko mentioned if CJ Corona was his student as being a professor he will definitely fail CJ Corona for that interpretation. Whats your opinion on this?
First, Koko should not be talking about the merits of the case to the media because he is a judge of the impeachment trial. He’s obviously trying to influence the public. Second, the best way to know how the majority interpret the law is to look at how the rest of the 188 congressmen will treat the waiver.
BTW, we are talking about Corona’s savings, right? He is free to put his savings wherever he wants to. If his interpretation is wrong, my question is, is that an impeachable crime? Was it even intentional?
CJ gave a completely perverted interpretation.
US$ is an asset. If he argues it is completely confidential, he should still report it in his SALN (and provide a peso equivalent).
I am speaking from Canadian perspective here (I know—we’re talking of the Philippines)….but here, for all your income made outside of Canada, you still need to report it but one must report the Canadian equivalent (this is for tax purposes).
I’ve spoken to 5 classmates in law school (yes, they’re lawyers back home) who didn’t agree with this impeachment case against Corona. Surprisingly, 4 of them now believe Corona should be impeached because of his perverse interpretation of the law and his clear non-reporting of his assets in his SALN.
Clearly, out of CJ’s own mouth came the admission that he did not declare in his SALN some assets under his name, four USD accounts included. As such, it can be considered violation of ethical standards for public officials. Unfortunately however, this violation is not included among impeachable offenses under the Constitution. In fact there is even a law that provides remedy for those who made honest misdeclaration in their SALN.
It’s sad because I feel that CJ will be convicted by the Senate. I was one of those who were very much disappointed when he walked out (I believe he did). He earned the ire of some of the senators because of that. His fate was sealed not because of convincing evidences, but politics and lack of statemanship came into play.
Quo Vadis Pilipinas?
Well, it seems Miauw Ming and Ilda sufficiently addressed most of your concerns.
Allow me to state the following, however.
“First of all, I want to say that I am not one of those partisan folks who lives inside a “bubbleâ€. What I mean is that I am not about to say “to hell with Corona†or “Corona is innocent†regardless of the evidence simply because of my particular leanings.”
Well, I’m pleased to inform you that we’re the same. None of my articles impart the notion that I want Corona acquitted, and that I’ll stand by his side no matter what. In fact, I haven’t even speculated on his verdict.
As to Corona’s illness, well, I’m not a doctor, but I searched for common symptoms of hypoglycemia, and, as it turns out, people don’t have to drop dead to be convincing.
– nervousness,
– sweating,
– intense hunger,
– trembling,
– weakness,
– palpitations, and
– often have trouble speaking.
(Source: http://www.medicinenet.com/hypoglycemia/page2.htm#toce)
The case gets stronger when hypoglycemia is triggered… by insulin intake.
“The vast majority of patients with diabetes only experience this degree of hypoglycemia if they are on medications or insulin. Patients (with diabetes or who have insulin resistance) with high circulating levels of insulin who fast or lower their carbohydrate intake drastically should also be cautioned. These individuals may also experience modest hypoglycemia.”
(Same source)
Taking care of hypoglycemic episodes can be simple (intake of softdrinks, sodas, etc.), but I guess Corona’s condition was unattended long enough for him to REALLY get sick. My guess is that he started experiencing the symptoms (or some of them), at the latter part of his testimony.
“I think it is highly unfair for you to lump all those who have legitimate views and who came to their own honest conclusion of the CJ’s testimony as part of a bunch of people who have made up their minds against Corona regardless of the evidence.”
Okay, I don’t think I did this. D:
I expressed “suspicion,” regarding the conclusion of many Filipinos that Corona’s illness was an act, and then offered my reasons. Does that entail an accusation that Filipinos who think otherwise have, as you say, “made up their minds against Corona regardless of the evidence”?
As to the waiver thing, all I did was to highlight many Filipinos’ apparent hypocrisy regarding the events in the impeachment trial, which is very well observable.
“I have expressed this sentiment several times already on this site. I noticed that the writers of GRP (some of them) appear to see things in black and white…that those who do not agree with them are all part of the “stupid Pinoys†or are Aquino trolls or are Noytards.”
Are you accusing me of seeing things in “black and white”? Please be specific. But then, for the record, I have never bashed anyone here. In fact, I welcome dissenting views and do my best to address them.
Yeah, I guess that’s about it. And I don’t do one-liners. I don’t have the talent. D:
Have a nice day, and thanks for your input. 🙂
“I think it is highly unfair for you to lump all those who have legitimate views and who came to their own honest conclusion of the CJ’s testimony as part of a bunch of people who have made up their minds against Corona regardless of the evidence.â€
Okay, I don’t think I did this. D:
————–
I think you just did. You do realize that us “Filipinos” are not just the people on facebook, tv and forums. And yet you sound like you judge every single Filipino has already passed judgement on the accused. It is very offensive that this article attacks every one of the 93 million citizens. This article is more of what you think of our race than what you see of the issue.
I respecfully object. 🙂
Okay, let’s try to settle this issue as soon as possible. Oh, and my previous statements still stand. ^^
The tricky part is the existence of default quantifiers.
When I say “the sum of the angles in a triangle is equal to 180 degrees,” do I really have to put up the following?
“…except in cases where spherical geometry is applied, where the sum of the angles of a “spherical” triangle with a positive curve can be greater than 180 degrees (less than 180 degrees if the triangle has a negative curve)”
I don’t. Now, before you accuse me of sidetracking the issue, know that I’m only offering an analogy. The same principle applies to common news headlines we see:
“China and Philippines argue over Panatag Shoal… except Filipinos and Chinese who either don’t care or love each other and want peace”
There is no real need to add more words just to prove your point. There is already an unseen assumption that the quantification is existential, not universal. And the very same principle applies to my article.
Feel free to imagine the words “some” beside the word “Filipinos” in my article, but know that I haven’t used the quantifier “all.” This validates my argument about the existence of, as I mentioned earlier, “default quantifiers.”
And if your argument that my article offends every Filipino, how come many people here at GRP get my point? Heck, how come that there are Filipinos who understand what I’m trying to say?
To be generous, I shall try explicitly putting up existential quantifiers like “some” to fully clarify my points. But think about this; you actually have a choice to be offended.
If you think the criticisms here speak well of you, then I guess you are entitled to be offended. Otherwise, then you’re entitled not to. It’s a matter of personal honesty and open-mindedness. 🙂
Oh, and to address the latter part of your argument:
“This article is more of what you think of our race than what you see of the issue.”
Yup, because the events at the impeachment trial speak well of the problems with many/some/most (pick your favorite quantifier) Filipinos.
Well, I hope I’ve made my case clear. Have a nice day! 🙂
So for those people who have a legitimate, rational reason to suspect Corona’s actions, or to simply challenge what we at GRP believe in, then please feel free to make yourselves known, and I will recognize you. I pay attention to dissenters.
Otherwise, I would just ignore all dissenting comments in the first place. But I think I have proven that that’s not exactly what I do.
Oh, by the way, append “and qualifiers” to every “quantifiers” you will see in my reply, since my explanation also touched on qualifiers, not just quantifiers. Thanks!
read this.. i think this person has the authority to speak about the SALN and other accounts…. maybe you will not argue with a CPA lawyer who specializes in SALN and has worked in BIR for 32 years…
As usual Arche,great write-up 😀
Thanks very much, FallenAngel! 🙂
There are very few who come out of the impeachment process with any distinction, and the majority have shown either a lack of competence, integrity, honesty, or simply a personal agenda which overrides the principles of law and their duty to the country.
A dysfunctional society is an apt description and it has been vividly on display for the world to see, and to be bemused by such insularity and backwardness.
The motley crew of senators and congressmen are a laughing stock and exemplify why the country has been, and continues to be, in decline for 50+ years
Clearly the country is incapable of running itself with children and amateurs at the helm. Passengers on the titanic stood more chance than someone born in the philippines.
It will clearly get worse, and the apathy/subservient nature of the people will simply blame god/destiny, look for ways to escape the country, or beg from other govts/foreigner.
“Pathetic” said drilon. Yes – he and his cohorts certainly are. Thank god they are excluded from decent society in the west and confined to an island.
when asked if he will sign the waiver and open his bank accounts, here is his answer…
“I report all my assets in my SALn. There is no requirement that we open up our bank deposits because, if that is the case, it will be disastruous to our banking system,†Drilon said.
enough said…
then the CJ was right not to disclose his dollar accounts. hmmm…or i’m confused… :p
not confused.
just that drilon is the definition of a hypocrite
if it’s him, it will be disastrous to the banking system, but for months now, he has been asking CJ to open his and CANNOT understand why he won’t….drilon is not just a hypocrite….he is a hypopocrite….:D
I was stunned when i saw that all people talked about in social websites (youtube, facebook, twitter, etc) was corona’s alleged walkout. I mean wtf??! Yun lang ba nakita nila?? Wala ba silang narinig sa tatlong oras na statement ni corona kundi ang “i wish to be excused”??? Karamihan lang naman sa kanila sumabay sa bandwagon ng anticorona at kung tatanungin mo mga walang alam sa tungkol sa trial. Sinasabing kurakot si corona eh hindi naman yung issue!!!!!! Argggghhhhh
Btw, great article arche. Two thumbs up waay up!
Exactly. They only want to mock him. They have no interest in hearing his side. Oh, and thank you, vinsanity! 🙂
Great article Arche!!!!
Thank you, Bill Steffen! 🙂
I have a different viewpoint. I believe we are not a dysfunctional society taken as a whole. The improved society of Mr. BS Aquino consists mostly of his present day yellow pharisees, his yellow militant instant mobs, his uncivil society groupies and their anarchist followers, his socialist/communist partners in power, the gullible and the ignorant.
BS Aquino and his fanatic followers and supporters should therefore be identified as comprising the unique dysfunctional anomaly of minority sectors of society. The silent majority exists in this country. These are your normal, everyday people. They have aspirations and dreams of a better Philippines. We cannot say that all of our people are like the political yellow anomaly.
Can’t say I disagree. But then, taking my last statement into account, the fact that there are dysfunctions in our society does not necessitate that our society is ENTIRELY dysfunctional.
Thank you for your input. 🙂
arche read this article… maybe you will not argue with a CPA lawyer who worked in BIR for 32 years… http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195381/%E2%80%98corona-can%E2%80%99t-testify-on-dollar-accounts%E2%80%99
sorry wrong person….
was it just me or the CJ was yellowish at the 3rd part of his speech? something I noticed.
on another note, we’re waiting for the Philippines’ reaction for Jessica’s loss in AI
p-noy’s endorsement spelt disaster for jessica!
i think pacman’s presence made her lose…:D
early reactions very predictable.
she lost because
race, fixed, not white, not american!
no wonder philippines no good at sport.
cant even lose with dignity.
p.s. she is american
I hate it whenever people refer to her as Filipino.
She’s an american of Filipino heritage. There’s no such thing as an American race (cause we call them Native Americans now)
Racist or not, America loves Phillips more.
Sucks for fans but that’s life.
I have been reading your posts for a long time now and I am with you in your views regarding the CJ, PNoy etc. I just hope that the masses would be able to read these stuff considering most of them are tambays of the internet cafe. Why not write a tagalog version of your posts for them to understand these issues and stop dragging the CJ and the former admin to the fate of this country. Thank you.
Thank you! Well, English is GRP’s mode of communication, so that we can reach out to as many people as possible.
I do have a personal blog. I shall consider putting up a Filipino version of my articles, provided that I have both time and energy. Again, thanks!
On one hand, you have a literally sick bastard who spent five-six months on the receiving end of excoriation by the media for alleged crimes.
On the other hand, you have the entire machinery of the Imperial Government shitting on the guy’s rights just to get him to GTFO.
If the Yellow Army can do that to Corona, what’s going to stop them from doing the same to anyone who opposes them?
Good point. I believe Corona touched on that very topic in the course of his opening statement, highlighting PNoy’s apparent vindictiveness in getting him ousted from office.
Arche:
If the Impeachment Court decides that CJ Corona betrayed the public trust by failing to declare his Dollar accounts; then, by all means, let CJ Corona be impeached and forthwith removed from office.
But, having done that, should the Impeachment Court not also fulfill the LAST WISH of the condemned CJ Corona–the signed individual WAIVER from his accusers? If those condemned to be crucified are entitled to a “last wish,†why not CJ Corona?
Why? For comparison’s sake; and, of course, to later become the model or standard, since the act of comparing–of allowing the side-by-side examination for similarities and differences between those of the accusers and that of the accused–would be the best test to determine whether there, indeed, was a willing “betrayal of public trust†by the accused CJ Corona, which is, failure to declare his Dollar accounts.
Actually, as epitomes of such “public trust‖with nothing to hide–there is be NO need of executing such a WAIVER at all, for his accusers are presumed to have come with clean hands and to have prepared with due diligence as “public officers†their respective SALN, real estate and bank statements to be true and correct.
So, grant the condemned CJ Corona’s LAST WISH and let the accusers (Drilon included) sign the WAIVER!
Well, by virtue of the law alone, the persons challenged by Corona don’t really have an obligation to accept that challenge.
However, if public trust and reputation are concerned, then their refusal would be at their own risk. Indeed, as I said, that waiver challenge is pretty damn nifty. 🙂
Thanks for your input!
Given that the prosecution wants proof, why not accept Corona’s challenge? That way, if proof exists of his wrongdoing, the prosecutors themselves can prove that they, not him, have clear consciences–if it is proven that they have done no wrong.
That I agree. That challenge is unacceptable in a court of law. It is childish, and accepting it reduced them to the childish and lowly ground Corona wants to play.
Last wish should be granted and the Filipino’s that want Crucifixion should examine their great defender of daang matuwid.
Corona’s challenge is great. But I think he stopped short of embarrassing those 189.
He should have photocopied that waiver and slapped each of those 189 with a copy.
Porky Drilon and the Congressmen who refuse to sign the waiver…are very much afraid to show to the people, the money, they’d stolen and accumulated in their Bank Accounts. Even if you drag these people, kicking and screaming…they will never sign any waiver. If you refuse to sign the waiver: it just show one thing – you are hiding , maybe 82 Bank Accounts or more. How did you accumulate such amount of money, and accounts? Noynoy Aquino, and his staff, and other government officials, must also open their Bank Accounts…even their offshore, foreign Bank Accounts…
to those who are constantly banging CJ Corona for not disclosing his dollar accounts please read this article http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/195381/%E2%80%98corona-can%E2%80%99t-testify-on-dollar-accounts%E2%80%99… this is an interview on Mrs. Martinez… she explained why the dollar accounts could not be written in the SALN… she worked with BIR for 32 years specializing on SALN’s of our ‘honorable’ public officials… if you think you are better than her then you must be a retard and a pretentious and boastful jerk… CJ gave the correct definition of the law…
maybe it’s high time to admit that most if not all of us Filipinos submit to the popular notions… to the notions that appears to have more supporters rather than supporting the truth… a lot of people are shouting in the streets that they want the truth from their public officials… and now that CJ Corona allowed us to enter the things that should have been private we tried to struck the minor details about the trial and try to sensationalize them… i mean come on people… all those media blitz have been released on tv but how many of us here really sit down for 4 hours or more just to see the whole of the impeachment trial?? i cannot say that CJ Corona is fully not guilty…. but in the 42 days of watching one of the worst political circus of our country…. my intelligent self would tell me that the most reasonable thing to do is to acquit the CJ…
My first visit. An interesting read and entertaining replies from different point of views.
Bias is my first impression. I asked myself why is this seemed to be an intelligent guy is defending a losing battle. The good guy vs the bad guy.
What are you made of? Liberal or conservative?
By the way please do be careful with the qualifiers and quantifiers. That could come back and bite your behind.
Thanks