Those alleged rice hoarders, the raids, the NBI and Department of Justice: What the President doesn’t know

    Painting by Franz Marc. Fighting Forms.  32 x 24 in. Used here for  educational, non-commercial purposes, free service by blog-use of image provided by and from www.allposters.com

    

          The President yesterday literally sat at the preliminary investigation  of alleged rice hoarders at the Department of Justice, on its fourth or sixth week, all the time – as reported by the press- glancing at her watch as part of her body language to communicate that she was getting impatient.

        What the President doesn’t know is there’s such a thing as inquest. Which takes half a day or two days. And not six weeks like what the DOJ is doing with the P.I.. Duh.

      That is what you get for keeping political appointee Raul Gonzales whose only “qualification” is his canine loyalty (with apologies to dogs and dog lovers). You have to go to the DOJ every other week, while your DOJ secretary a couple of weeks ago justified his snail’s pace (with apologies to snails) by saying (in an interview): “Well, the President is not a lawyer. She doesn’t know there should be a preliminary investigation …”

      Her dogs are running circles around her. What the President doesn’t know is if the respondents/ suspects were in flagrante delicto,  they can be brought in for inquest. Since some if not all of the respondents were proceeded against after a “raid” or a valid warrantless search of rice warehouses, and  prima facie  evidence of hoarding were found  (“undue accumulation beyond the normal inventory levels” etc.) the owners thereof could have been inquested  (they could ask to sign a waiver later and ask to avail of the statutory right of prelim investigation, but did the NBI make an effort to inquest?). Inquest takes 12 to 48 hours. Not six weeks of preliminary investigation.

      The  President deserves Raul Gonzales. Let her dogs run circles around her while she sits crammed in preliminary investigations as part of her publicity stunts. Maybe the NBI and NFA were not sure of what they were doing during those raids. Maybe they were not sure that the amount of the inventory was prima facie evidence of  hoarding as to be punishable. And that was why they didn’t make any arrests, valid warrantless, and therefore: no inquests were done. They probably think they’ll just ride this out and go through the motions while the President needs to build a good press.  

      Some pertinent provisions:

       Quote “RA 7581. SECTION 5.    Illegal Acts of Price Manipulation. — Without prejudice to the provisions of existing laws on goods not covered by this Act, it shall be unlawful for any person habitually engaged in the production, manufacture, importation, storage, transport, distribution, sale or other methods of disposition of goods to engage in the following acts of price manipulation of the price of any basic necessity or prime commodity.

 

     Quote “1)Hoarding, which is the undue accumulation by a person or combination of persons of any basic commodity beyond his or their normal inventory levels or the unreasonable limitation or refusal to dispose of, sell or distribute the stocks of any basic necessity of prime commodity to the general public or the unjustified taking out of any basic necessity or prime commodity from the channels of reproduction, trade, commerce and industry. There shall be prima facie evidence of hoarding when a person has stocks of any basic necessity or prime commodity fifty percent (50%) higher than his usual inventory and unreasonably limits, refuses or fails to sell the same to the general public at the time of discovery of the excess. The determination of a person’s usual inventory shall be reckoned from the third month immediately preceding before the discovery of the stocks in case the person has been engaged in the business for at least three (3) months; otherwise, it shall be reckoned from the time he started his business.

XXXXX

 

    Quote “SECTION 15.    Penalty for Acts of Illegal Price Manipulation. — Any person who commits any act of illegal price manipulation of any basic necessity or prime commodity under Section 5 hereof shall suffer the penalty of imprisonment for a period of not less than five (5) years nor more than Fifteen (15) years, and shall be imposed a fine of not less than Five thousand pesos (P5,000) nor more than Two million pesos (P2,000,000)

_0_0_0_0

      Quote “Rules of Court. Rule 112. Sec. 7. When accused lawfully arrested without warrant. – When a person is lawfully arrested without a warrant involving an offense which requires a preliminary investigation, the complaint or information may be filed by a prosecutor without need of such investigation provided an inquest has been conducted in accordance with existing rules. In the absence or unavailability of an inquest prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person.

             Quote “Before the complaint or information is filed, the person arrested may ask for a preliminary investigation in accordance with this Rule, but he must sign a waiver of the provision of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, in the presence of his counsel. Notwithstanding the waiver, he may apply for bail and the investigation must be terminated within fifteen (15) days from its inception.

            Quote “After the filing of the complaint or information in court without a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within five (5) days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense  as provided in this Rule.” Closed-quote.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Media Law Morning

 

MEDIA LAW MORNING

 

 

Stu.#/1st Exam+2nd Exam+Report=Total=Grade

05-15862 \40 + 50+1 =10 = 1.25

06-33526\35.5+45+18= 98.5=1.75

04-78016  \ LOA   LOA LOA   LOA   

03-14977\ 23+ 23+ 23= 69= 2.5

05-13001\46 +  39+ 17= 102= 1.5

03-15267\ 39+ 32.5+ 25= 96.5=1.75

05-75129\ 25+ 45+23=93=1.75

04-52977\ 38.5 + 29.5+ 23= 91 = 2.0

05-03461\24 +24+ 21=69+ 2.5

05-70432\17+33+ 21=71= 2.5

04-66719\ 20+ 37+21=78=  2.25

04-53303\ 20+ 42+23= 85=  2.0

05-04977\ 34.5+ 22.5+ 23= 80=  2.25

05-78611\13 + 13 + 18 =44  = 4.0

05-39069 \27+ 38.5+ 17= 82.5= 2.25

04-95096\ 48+ 16+ 22= 86= 2.0

04-78827\ 29+ 33+ 20=82= 2.25

04-02842\34+ 32.5+ 17= 83.5= 2.25

05-79158\25+ 30.5+ 24= 79.5= 2.25      

04-15643\52+ 39+ 22=113=1.25

05-73432\35.5+ 37.5+ 15= 88= 2.0

05-18188\31.5+ 34+ 21= 86.5= 2.0

04-08948\33+ 35+ 25= 93=1.75   

04-11490\ 27.5+ 30.5+15= 73=2.5

05-19264\29+ 46+ 15= 90= 2.0

04-22171\39+ 38+ 21= 98=1.75

05-04565\ 24+ 46.5+ 23=93.5=1.75

04-21361\44.5+ 22.5+19= 86= 2.0

 

 

Jan.28, 2008 First Exam, Media Law Morning

1.What  is the Constitution? What is the difference between the Constitution and  statutes? What is the social contract theory? Explain using the Nov. 29 Manila Pen incident as take-off point. (10pts)

2.Make a diagrammatic presentation of the structure of the judiciary.(10 pts)

3.Now and then, there is a proposal to revive the Anti-Subversion Law which criminalizes mere membership in the communist party without any need to prove overt acts of participation in an armed uprising. Using the dissenting opinionof Justice Holmes in Abrams vs. United States, comment on the proposal. (Who and what were punished, and with what jail term, in said case? Why did Justice Holmes dissent?) (5pts.)

4.Last year, the First Gentleman had about 27 or so pending libel cases against 90 or so journalists (after his near-death experience with a heart attack, he withdrew them). During certain points when the libel cases were pending, he said he filed them because he had been hurt by all the “lies” peddled against him. Can FG find comfort in what Justice Malcolm said in U.S. vs. Bustos? (What is that case all about and what did Justice Malcolm say?) (5 pts)

5.During the Nov. 29 Manila Pen incident, the PNP top brass called up the news directors of the broadcast stations and asked them not to air any live feed, audio and video, of the formation of government troops.  Is this a form of prior restraint? What is prior restraint? What can and cannot be the subject of prior restraint? Enumerate and explain using the pertinent case taken up in class. (10pts.)  

6.The headline of a news item said that the Philippines was on the watchlist of the WTO intellectual property council. What does this mean? Why are we on the watchlist? What is intellectual property? What is copyright? What is TRIPS, and what are its effects? Apply TRIPS to our situation of being on the watchlist. (10pts)

7.Ashley Olseng has been a reporter on a year-to-year basis in a leading TV network for seven years. An internal  complaint for  corruption (an allegation that she received P10,000 in exchange for producing a report about a congressman) was lodged against her; she was given a copy and fired upon receipt. Does Ashley Olseng have any rights? Enumerate, if any; and enumerate the grounds for termination. Explain fully. (10 pts.)

 

-30-30-30-30-30-30-30-30-30-

 Second Test, Media Law Morning,  March 25, 2008.

1.Enumerate the laws taken up in class that constitute limits to freedom of expression. (9 pts)

2.Enumerate the laws taken up in class that constitute limits to news-gathering methods.  (5 pts)   

3.Can a tv drama episode be made out of the lifestory of Jun Lozada? Why or why not? State your legal basis; specify and elaborate. State the general rule,  exceptions if any. (6pts.)

4.The Inquirer reported that a senior DFA official said that linking the ZTE alleged kickbacks to the Spratlys deal will “threaten RP-China relations”, and may even incite shooting in the Spratlys.  A congressman issued the following statement: “But the armed guards of China stationed  some of the islands in the Spratlys are already shooting at fishermen from Palawan who happen to drift in the area. We’re not doing anything about our claims. If China finds oil in the Spratlys, do you think China will share it with us? The naval fleet of China will be in the Spratlys and Palawan to guard and mine the oil. Our territory has been sold to China for a hundred million dollars!” Does the following constitute lawful speech? Why or why not? (5 pts) Enumerate the laws on public order taken up in class and their essential elements. (5 pts) Total: 10 pts

5.At the height of the Senate investigation on the ZTE alleged kickbacks, text messages were circulated that former Comelec chair Ben Abalos supposedly had an extramarital affair with a reporter, who was named in the text messages, when he was MMDA chair. He was asked questions on this in subsequent press conferences and news stories came out on the alleged former “mistress”, who was named and even photographed and hounded and asked questions. Are these news stories libellous vis-a-vis Ben Abalos? What about vis-a-vis the alleged former “mistress”. Why or why not? State your legal basis (5 pts); Enumerate  categories; state the pertinent doctrine or principle (5 pts). Total: 10 pts.

6.Under the topic “right to a fair trial versus free speech”, four different kinds of prejudicial publicity were taken up in class. State only two  and describe each. (5).

7.  In “In re Jurado”, then Justice Reynato Puno, now Chief Justice, wrote in his dissenting opinion: “(W)e should take comfort in the thought that falsehoods cannot destroy, only truth does but only to set us free.” In the context of the said case, and the legal issue in said case (specify the legal issue), what did he mean by that? (5pts)

8.What kinds of images/ scenes/ action/ film/ photos do you consider obscene or pornographic as to be violative of Art. 201 of the Revised Penal Code? (5 pts)  State your legal basis by using the cases taken up in class. (5 pts). Total:10 pts. 

-30-30-30-30-30-30-30-30-