Tag: People vs. Estrada

Rules of Court, The News Media

Yehey! Live Media coverage granted!

marsminerva.jpg

 

“The Combat of Mars and Minerva” by Jacques Louis David from abcgallery.com

 

The Supreme Court saved the day for posterity and world history. ABS-CBN news reported at 5:47 pm today that the Supreme Court has granted the petition for a live media coverage.

According to abs-cbnnews.com, the Supreme Court has allowed one video camera to be operated only by Supreme Court personnel to be positioned at a designated area, and the camera would focus only on the court personnel reading the decision.

Had the Supreme Court not acted on this with dispatch, we would have lost any optical documentation of the promulgation and the world would think that the Courts in this country are hiding something with the continued refusal (now overturned) to allow video documentation of its disposition of the case.

One video camera “equalizes” the kind of images that all the television networks would have. (not good for free enterprise; but well…)

Can I just make one teeny-weeny suggestion? Even as the camera is focused only on the court personnel reading the decision, maybe it would be visually more complete if the cameraman would use a long shot instead of a tight shot of the court personnel; I don’t think the court personnel’s hair or back of his/her head, no matter how beautiful, and I’m sure it’s beautiful, , would have documentation value. So, maybe a long shot would contain more information , and therefore more documentation value, than a tight shot of the face or hair of the court personnel. Also, in all the hearings in this case, the court camera had been positioned in one corner after the justices’ bench, to their right. That’s a good position, so maybe for consistency’s sake, that could be maintained.

Maraming salamat po. Ako ay lubos na gumagalang.


Criminal law, Rules of Court, The President

The amphibians have to go

eucharistic-justice.jpg
“Eucharistic Justice” by Farid de la Ossa Arrieta from www.dlibrary.acu.edu.au

 

 

It is so like the Catholic Church (speaking through Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales) to preach to the public that they should accept whatever decision the Sandiganbayan would hand down in the Estrada plunder case:

 

“Of course [a guilty verdict] would be painful for others. But we have to accept whatever would be decision,” he said. (abs-cbnnews.com).

 

People should read, they shouldn’t just accept.

 

They should examine the pieces of evidence laid out, and not be swayed, or stilled, by the agitation, or pacification of their “leaders”.

 

And they can disagree. People are allowed to express their disagreement in orderly even if noisy, discourses, i.e., no smashing of windows and throwing of pillboxes and rocks. But shouting, walking, marching, stabbing the air with clenched fists – those are all legal, they’re not criminalized.

 

I don’t think the government would need amphibious vehicles on stand-by in case riots break out. The AFP displayed its APC’s, M-60’s, tanks, and amphibious vehicles, as preparation for the promulgation. Of course, seeing that Malacañang is by the Pasig river, it is imaginable that contingency plans for urban warfare would include the use of amphibious vehicles either as a physical exit plan for the President or an emergency rescue plan; but guys, really now….amphibians….i don’t know.

 

The decision would be, as in all cases, a matter of public record, and people have the right to examine the basis of the decision and see if it is supported by evidence beyond all reasonable doubt. That’s the standard, beyond all reasonable doubt, and it is the burden of the prosecution. If you think it’s a “he-said-she-said”, look at the corroborating evidence. Look at the bank accounts. Please look at them. And the bank employees’ testimonies. The deposits. The checks, in one account then in another and another then in the foundation. 200 million pesos, 28 pieces 28 times. The check, commissions one hundred eighty nine million pesos; then the trust accounts please look at them three billion and two million pesos.

 

If acquitted, all the accused can go ahead with whatever plans they have, their legal team would be congratulated, their supporters thanked. There is no appeal. The State in a criminal case is allowed only one shot at it (one criminal trial); double jeopardy attaches. Those who disagree with the decision can express themselves fully and orderly. On the other hand, if the decision goes in another direction; and the accused are not satisfied with the decision, they can appeal and have every right to file an appeal; and the principal accused here has expressed his intention to do so. I do not know anything about the supposed offer of presidential pardon, but if that were true, it’s really up to the team of the accused whether they’d withdraw their appeal in order to accept it; or what recourse they would take. Live to fight another day.

 

Those who think or know that the Court is honest and competent and who think or know that, since the members are honest and competent, the decision would be based solely on the evidence, and that people are intelligent and wise enough to discern whether the trial and the decision had been fair and just, would sleep easy at night.

 

But please still read.

 

 

And not sleep too deeply though. If we think or have evidence that that this regime itself is more corrupt than anything we’ve ever seen, we should outlive and outwit it one more day.

 

But the amphibians have to go.


messages

To my dear readers

Plaintiff’s Memo in People vs. Estrada et al, at the Ombudsman’s site will be re- posted as soon as possible. (It was pulled out due to minor typo’s.) Thank you.