Theories of a Brown Monkey
Even though I finished a degree in Philosophy in my Bachelor's, I'll still pursue it in the Graduate school and beyond because of love. I know, it's a corny reason, but love makes you corny, and loving wisdom makes me corny, so sue me.
Anywho, as the days pass and I grow older in this discipline, I realize the extent of my own stupidity. And realizing how big are these gaps, my appetite for knowledge is whetted all the more.
You see, the battle against ignorance and suffering is a life-long battle, and our only consolation, aside of course having the good life, is an ice-cold beer by the end of every week. Cheers.
Joseph Guillermo
Create Your Badge
There are currently 32 monkeys typing randomly about Shakespeare.
Theme by nostrich.
Post with 4 notes
I do not know how some people who emotionally invested on the acquittal of Chief Justice Corona arrive at the scenario of a PNoy dictatorship, of anarchy, or the loss of the rule of law. From where I sit, I hear no mob amassing at EDSA shrine or at the Central Temple, no plebeians storming the Palace or the Supreme Court, no exponent rise on burning or looting or raping. Is this vigilance on their part? Or fear-mongering? An attempt of self-prophecy? Remember, lest we forget, that the Marcos dictatorship, or any dictatorships for that matter, were built and fed not by Democratic checks and balances, but on fear: the fear of tomorrow, the fear to hope.
Post with 1 note
A conversation with the Law student P. Dychitan of Ateneo on Miram’s opinions of the Prosecution and some comments on our differences
Guillermo: I have to ask, is a criticism against the mental and psychological acumen against a Senator-juror covered by the sub judice doctrine? From where I sat throughout that lecture, she basically invoked sub judice as a way to preempt comments against the Senate, or particularly her actually, of being retarded.
Dychitan: Mere criticisms about the senator judge’s mental capacity is covered by one’s freedom of speech. But if you’ll listen carefully, what Miriam is actually criticizing is the fact that the prosecutors’ tendency of arguing their case outside of the impeachment court when the only reason why they cannot proceed with the presentation of their witnesses and evidence is the simple fact that they did not do their homework.
Guillermo: I understand of course the Defense represents the CJ, but I have to ask, who does the prosecution represents?
And what do you mean they did not do their homework? As far as I’m observing and keeping tally of the proceedings, the presentation of documents and witnesses are pretty much smooth flowing. They got the SALN, a couple of titles of properties, the peso accounts from BPI, PSBank surrendered a couple more accounts, also we have Sec. De Lima, a cameraman, and a doctor. We observe too the hiccups, or actually the delay, like the TRO on the dollar accounts (around 3 court days), the anonymous source of PSBank sig cards (around 10 court days), and the Valentine ruling of the SC on Judicial privilege (basically making it harder to subpoena Court justices and employees). But surely you cannot fault the prosecution of ‘not doing their homework’ for circumstances already outside them. I can’t see how your, or Miriam’s, syllogism could tell us they are ’ not doing their homework’.
Dychitan: I have to ask, if you seem to be watching the impeachment proceedings more than I do why do you need to ask me who the prosecution represents? Can’t you deduce it from the goings on in the impeachment proceeding?
Maybe Miriam, me, Matthew, and my other peers see it differently because there is something different between us and you.
Guillermo: Oh please do, jaguillermo@live.com, if that would not waste your time.
(Note: To date, as of Feb. 28, 2011, no electronic mail has been sent.)
Photoset reblogged from looking for mendiola with 9 notes
The bond forged between us was not one that could be broken by absence, distance, or time … As I would always belong to him, so would he always be mine.
From New Moon by Stephenie Meyer.
Source: lookingformendiola
Link reblogged from MLQ3 on Tumblr! with 4 notes
The debate in the 1986 Constitutional Commission on whether impeachment should be vested in the Supreme Court or not →
mlq3:
July 28, 1986 R.C.C. 41
MS. AQUINO: I appreciate the explanation of the Committee Chairman. But for purposes of conceptual clarity, we might as well underscore the fact that impeachment, although it is an exercise of a political act, is essentially a judicial function. The political component here would be necessary in recognizing that an impeachment procedure, which is a judicial function, covers not only political matters but even legal matters.
MR. MONSOD: We realize that there is a judicial function involved in the impeachment process. But I think the questions we want to address ourselves are: Is the provision on impeachment still necessary? Does it serve a useful purpose as far as the political processes are concerned?
MS. AQUINO: I may be launching a lonely crusade here. Even as I would concede that the powers of impeachment might have to be vested in the legislature, I would conduct a massive overhaul of the procedures to make impeachment procedure a viable option.
MR. MONSOD: We would be very happy to take a look at any suggestion that would improve our Constitution.
MS. AQUINO: Do I take it to mean that I am effectively foreclosed in terms of a conceptual redefinition of impeachment procedures when I would attempt to vest it in the judicial courts insofar as the presidency is concerned?
MR. MONSOD: Yes. Mr. Presiding Officer, I believe the Committee at this point believes that an overhaul in that direction might not be appropriate. But we would be amenable to other suggestions in order to make it a more effective deterrent.
MS. AQUINO: My only concern is that experience has shown that impeachment procedures as they are now stated in the draft would be nothing more — pardon the Freudian slip but there is no better term for this — than a glorified act of political masturbation. There should be a conscious and deliberate attempt to make this a feasible and viable option in the exercise of a concern to protect the State against erring officers for malfeasance or misfeasance.
MR. MONSOD: Yes, Mr. Presiding Officer. We understand the Commissioner’s appreciation of the problem. What we are saying is that perhaps our perception of its deterrent effect even in cases where it seems to have failed may be different.
MR. NOLLEDO: May I propound an inquiry to Commissioner Aquino?
MS. AQUINO: Yes, gladly.
MR. NOLLEDO: The Commissioner need not overhaul the procedure. But it seems to me that she is suggesting some sort of judicial review; am I right?
MS. AQUINO: No, what I am suggesting is to transfer the impeachment power after the impeachment articles have been initiated and formulated by the joint action of the legislative chambers to the judicial courts.
MR. NOLLEDO: Thank you.
MR. OPLE: Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): Commissioner Ople is recognized.
MR. OPLE: Will Commissioner Aquino yield to a question, too?
MS. AQUINO: Gladly.
MR. OPLE: Commissioner Aquino must be aware that the main provision on impeachment in the draft article under discussion was lifted virtually from the two previous Constitutions, actually almost a verbatim copy of Article VII of the United States Constitution that was framed and ratified in 1787. May I briefly read Article VII:
Judgment in case of impeachment shall not extend further than the removal from office and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust or profit under the United States, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to indictment, trial, judgment, and punishment according to law.
It is almost unchanged since the American constitutional framers established this impeachment rule in the Constitution of 1787.
But the reason I brought this up was to induce Commissioner Aquino to recall a more recent event related to impeachment in the United States Congress of an American President, Richard Nixon, who was facing impeachment. As a matter of fact, the charges had already been formulated in a committee of the House of Representatives and he was to be tried by the Senate in the full glare of world television. Instead of submitting to impeachment proceedings, he resigned, and later on was granted amnesty by President Ford. The point is that impeachment is a sword in the scabbard. It is as good as a sword drawn; it certainly caused the resignation of an American President because, in the words of President Ford before he gave the amnesty to President Nixon, the presidency of the United States probably could not withstand the rigor and injury arising from a public trial in the Senate by impeachment of the President of the United States.
Since this section is indubitably of American origin, I think we are justified in recalling some American-examples in the contemporary period. I do not want to share Commissioner Aquino’s despair that this impeachment or trial by the Senate, through the origination of charges in the House of Representatives is equivalent to a constitutional decoration or tinsel. It is actually a powerful check on the presidency. It may be a sword in the scabbard but there are circumstances when a sword in the scabbard is as good as a sword drawn.
Thank you, Mr. Presiding Officer.
MS. AQUINO: Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): What is the pleasure of Commissioner Aquino?
MS. AQUINO: I appreciate Commissioner Ople’s setting the stimulus of the discussion on this line. But there may be a variance of conceptual appreciation here.
Impeachment is not intended to punish the offender. Impeachment is a method of national inquest to protect the State. It does not intend to prosecute; it is not intended for its retributory or restitutory effects. Rather, it is in the nature of an exemplary act by which the State infuses the highest sense of responsibility to public service.
In other words, when the Constitution provides that the intent of an impeachment proceeding is not only to remove from office, it follows as a necessary concurrent effect the disqualification of that erring public officer from positions of trust or responsibility. It may be true that it is a sword in the scabbard but the sword in the scabbard can rust unless it is drawn.
MR. GUINGONA: Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): The Chair would like to understand the present parliamentary situation. Is Commissioner Aquino proposing a specific amendment?
MS. AQUINO: Yes, Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): On what section and what is the nature of the amendment?
MS. AQUINO: It will overhaul massively Section 3 in the sense that I am contemplating the possibility of amending Section 3 to vest in the judicial courts the power of impeachment trials after the impeachment articles have been formulated and initiated by the joint action of the legislative chambers. But the Committee has expressed reluctance to this position.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): Precisely, the Chair would like to know the reaction of the Committee on the proposed amendment.
MR. MONSOD: Mr. Presiding Officer, the Committee explained its position that we believe the present provision serves a very useful purpose, and we want to see it retained. Furthermore, if I get the drift of the arguments of Commissioner Aquino, the overhaul would involve the introduction of the judicial branch of the government into the process in the case of the President.
Our position is that the President has been directly elected by the people. Since this is a political act, the more appropriate judge of the President in this matter should probably be the direct representatives of the people as well, which are the Senate and the House.
MS. AQUINO: Mr. Presiding Officer, I am presently inclined to respect the position of the Committee. However, without foreclosing the possibility of introducing pertinent amendments on the basis of their position, may I make two inquiries?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): The Commissioner may proceed.
MS. AQUINO: Am I in agreement with the Committee that impeachment proceedings are essentially judicial in nature?
MR. ROMULO: No, we believe that they are political. Judicial aspects may come in the procedures such as the forming of the articles, the actual trial being presided over by the Chief Justice, and so on. But we still believe that they are essentially a political act rather than a judicial act.
MS. AQUINO: Precisely, I was very careful on my formulation of terms when I said impeachment proceedings, not impeachment power. So, we are agreed on the premise that impeachment proceedings are essentially judicial in nature. Does it follow, therefore, that when the legislative chamber sits to undertake impeachment proceedings, it sits not as a legislative body but as a judicial body; rather, it sits as a court of justice?
MR. ROMULO: In a way, they probably sit more like jurists, as finders of fact and the law, I suppose. They combine those functions. We could say that there is an exercise of judicial power involved.
MS. AQUINO: On the basis of these shared premises, would the legislature then, sitting to undertake impeachment proceedings, still be bound by the rules of legislative sessions? Specifically, if the legislature adjourns, are the Members duty-bound to terminate or preterminate — as the case may be — the impeachment proceedings if the supervening circumstance of adjournment of the sessions come in?
MR. ROMULO: I think that would depend on the rules they would adopt. Certainly, the Constitution does not settle that.
MS. AQUINO: Because I would proceed from settled jurisprudence that impeachment proceedings are essentially judicial in nature, such that it follows that when the legislative chamber undertakes these proceedings it sits as a court of justice and, therefore. it is not bound by the rules of legislative sessions. It cannot adjourn. Assuming that the session is adjourned, impeachment proceedings should not, in any way, be affected by the adjournment of the session.
MR. ROMULO: That is not precluded from our proposal. If the Commissioner wants to make it explicit and to suggest amendments to that effect, I suppose we would not object. Our thinking is that if the Commissioner’s premise is that it is like a court of justice. maybe an adjournment of the hearing will certainly not preclude it from continuing the proceedings on some other day. In other words, it could not lose jurisdiction just because of adjournment.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): The Chair, therefore, understands from Commissioner Aquino that her proposed massive amendment is considered withdrawn.
MS. AQUINO: Not yet, Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): The Commissioner may proceed.
MS. AQUINO: On another point, if an impeachment proceeding has been filed against the President, for example, and the President resigns before judgment of conviction has been rendered by the impeachment court or by the body, how does it affect the impeachment proceeding? Will it be necessarily dropped?
MR. ROMULO: If we decide the purpose of impeachment to remove one from office, then his resignation would render the case moot and academic. However, as the provision says, the criminal and civil aspects of it may continue in the ordinary courts.
MS. AQUINO: I am not so much concerned about the civil and criminal aspects as I am concerned with the necessary effect of a judgment of conviction in an impeachment proceeding. A judgment of conviction also means disqualification from office; it does not only mean removal from office.
MR. ROMULO: Yes, I see that point. It is my personal opinion that if he resigns, that in itself would end the impeachment proceeding.
MR. RAMA: Mr. Presiding Officer.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): The Chair recognizes the Floor Leader.
MR. RAMA: There are several other Commissioners who would like to amend the Article. May I ask that Commissioner Regalado be recognized?
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): Just a minute. May we consider Commissioner Aquino’s proposed amendment withdrawn?
MS. AQUINO: No, Mr. Presiding Officer. I have to consult Commissioner Guingona about it.
MR. GUINGONA: Precisely, Mr. Presiding Officer, I was going to ask Commissioner Aquino a couple of questions, if I may, in connection with her proposal.
THE PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Treñas): Commissioner Guingona is recognized.
MR. GUINGONA: Is the Commissioner’s perception of an impeachment proceeding an exclusively political device or proceeding or an essentially political proceeding? If it is an essentially political proceeding, then there would be no objection to exceptions where courts may be allowed to be given the power to adjudicate on this particular proceeding. On the other hand, if it is exclusive because the President is elected by the people, the judgment about the President’s tenure or term of office should be judged by the representatives of the people, if the courts are not empowered to decide cases or questions relating to elections, and terms and qualifications of the President.
MS. AQUINO: Mr. Presiding Officer. may I briefly reply? It is my humble submission that an impeachment proceeding and an impeachment power are essentially political acts. But because of the nature of the judgment of conviction in an impeachment proceeding, it requires the process of adjudication. If we divorce ourselves from the conceptual definition of impeachment and focus on the practicality of impeachment proceedings, then it becomes necessary for us to reassess the procedure. I am not so much concerned in the conceptual purity of impeachment as I am concerned in it being a feasible and viable alternative in the exercise of protection of the State.
Source: mlq3
Photo with 3 notes
Arroyo’s partymate
MANILA, Philippines - The movie star-turned-politician is silent on Corona, the high court, and many legal and political issues. The high school graduate admits he will have difficulty keeping up with the impeachment trial. Lapid’s stand is uncertain but he has proven to be a loyal Arroyo ally.
During debates on the RH bill, he was quoted in GMA News as saying, “These senators are also lawyers who spent 10 years in law school while I spent 10 years practicing my stunts …. Much as I want to interpellate, my tongue is not used to English.” He added, “Wala akong magagawa kung ipinanganak ako nang mahirap, anak ng labandera eh, Hindi ako nakapag-aral dahil sa kahirapan.” (There’s nothing I can do because I was born poor, the son of a laundrywoman. I wasn’t able to go to school because of poverty.)
After becoming governor and vice governor of Pampanga, Lapid ran for the Senate in 2004. He joined the coalition of his cabalen, then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo called Koalisyon ng Katapatan at Karanasan para sa Kinabukasan (K-4). In 2007, Lapid ran for Makati mayor but Jejomar Binay beat him by a wide margin. Lapid sought the post reportedly to bar the opposition then from holding anti-Arroyo protests in Makati. Lapid ran in 2010 under Lakas-Kampi-CMD
Age: 56
Education: St. Catherine Academy in Porac, Pampanga (high school); Porac Central School in Pampanga (grade school). Lapid said he was unable to earn a college degree because he pursued acting.
Profession: movie actor
Terms: 2 (2004-2010; 2010-2016)
Political party: Lakas-Kampi-CMD
Plunder, graft cases:
In 2009, then Pampanga governor Fr. Eddie Panlilio filed a plunder case against Lapid, his son Mark and other former provincial officials. The Lapids were accused of failing to remit quarrying fees amounting to more than P500 million during their terms as governors. Then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, however, cleared the Lapids before she resigned in 2011.The elder Lapid also faced graft charges over the alleged illegal collection of quarry fees in 1998. Yet the Philippine Daily Inquirer reported that in 2004, the Ombudsman withdrew the case from the Sandiganbayan, saying the information was hearsay. The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism reported that during the Estrada administration, Lapid was also charged with graft for the alleged illegal purchase of real estate in San Fernando town, and his failure to account for over P2 million in cash advances.
Senate bloc:
Observers count Lapid as part of the bloc of Sen. Edgardo Angara which also includes Senators Loren Legarda and fellow actor-turned-lawmaker Bong Revilla. There were reports, though, that Lapid and Revilla bolted in July 2010 to support the bid of Sen. Francis Pangilinan to be senate president. Juan Ponce Enrile eventually got the post.
Position published or aired on Corona or on issues contained in the Articles of Impeachment:
Known to be silent and to shy away from debates, Lapid has not issued statements on Corona and the allegations against him.Instead, the senator said he is studying the rules of procedure with the help of his lawyers. He is expected to struggle through the impeachment trial because of the language and legalities.
He said in a radio interview, “May mga nang-iinsulto… Sila nga abogado, may abogado pa eh. Ako pa kayang hindi abogado? (I have been receiving insults …. Those who are already lawyers seek the counsel of lawyers. What more for a non-lawyer like myself?). - Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Philippine Star, Manila Standard Today, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, GMA News
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
![Doubting the Court
MANILA, Philippines - Despite numerous political affiliations, Osmeña takes pride in his independence. But by his own admission, the former Aquino campaign manager sides with the administration on Corona’s partiality to Arroyo.
The longtime senator believes the Chief Justice will soon resign. He told the Inquirer, “I expect the Chief Justice would probably find himself an excuse and resign, rather than go through the rigors, embarrassment and pain of a public trial.”
He added, “You cannot win if it’s a political trial. All the stink will come out. Whether true or not, a girl can come forward and say, ‘You raped me.’”
Osmeña also said party lines will not matter in the impeachment trial. With the mix of parties in the Senate, he said it will be difficult to get the numbers to convict Corona. He told the Philippine Star, “Nobody will be able to get the two-thirds vote. Only Manny Pacquiao can get that two-thirds vote.”
Yet he added, “Even if [Corona] wins with the other side not getting a two-thirds [vote], he is damaged. How can he continue to serve as Chief Justice?”
Age: 68
Education: Osmeña does not have a college degree but studied in schools like Harvard University, Georgetown University and the University of the Philippines. He is a farmer and businessman by training. He finished his high school from Beaumont College in England.
Senate work: Chairperson, Committee on Banks, Financial Institutions and Currencies
Terms: 3 (1995-2001; 2001-2007, 2010-2016)
Political Party: Independent
Osmeña comes from a family of politicians hailing from Cebu. His paternal grandfather, Sergio Sr. was president of the Philippines and former senator. His maternal grandfather, Esteban de la Rama, was also senator. Other senators in the family include his father, Sergio Jr., and cousin, John Henry.
Osmeña’s brother, Tomas, is representative of the second district of Cebu. Rep. Osmeña is a friend of former President Arroyo. He did not sign the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona.
During martial law, Osmeña was imprisoned for five years. Along with fellow detainee Eugenio “Geny” Lopez Jr, he escaped from a maximum security jail in Fort Bonifacio.
Senate bloc:
Osmeña has been independent at the Senate, even grilling Aquino appointees at the Commission on Appointments. Still, some observers think the Aquino ally may side with the LP bloc consisting of Senators Franklin Drilon, Francis Pangilinan, Ralph Recto and Teofisto Guingona III.
Role in the Estrada impeachment trial:
Osmeña was among the senator-judges who voted to open the controversial second envelope allegedly containing incriminating evidence against Estrada. They were overruled, though, in an 11-10 vote. This led to a walkout of prosecutors and the People Power uprising that toppled Estrada.
In December 2011, he told ABS-CBN News, “Remember, in the impeachment trial of Joseph Estrada, we lost the vote but it was the public who said he was guilty.”
Position published or aired on Corona or on topics related to the Articles of Impeachment:
Even before Corona’s impeachment, Osmeña defended President Aquino’s criticism of the Supreme Court. While not mentioning Corona, the senator told ABS-CBN News that a majority of the Court is openly partisan toward Arroyo.
He said, “You cannot continue tolerating a court until they’re 70 and they’ve been appointed by Gloria. They have been so partial to Gloria that who’s going to stand up for the Filipino people?”
Osmeña said he supports the Aquino administration’s “overall goal to throw out crooks and corrupt people in government.”
He told the Inquirer, “Gloria Arroyo really abused her power. So, to cover up for all her corruption, she set up a lot of land mines. She put Merceditas Gutierrez in the Office of the Ombudsman, and Renato Corona and some funny guys in the Supreme Court. All of them.” -Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Press statements of Sen. Osmeña, Philippine Star, Philippine Daily Inquirer, ABS-CBN News](http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz0xqfWrMP1qa1c6so1_500.png)
Doubting the Court
MANILA, Philippines - Despite numerous political affiliations, Osmeña takes pride in his independence. But by his own admission, the former Aquino campaign manager sides with the administration on Corona’s partiality to Arroyo.
The longtime senator believes the Chief Justice will soon resign. He told the Inquirer, “I expect the Chief Justice would probably find himself an excuse and resign, rather than go through the rigors, embarrassment and pain of a public trial.”
He added, “You cannot win if it’s a political trial. All the stink will come out. Whether true or not, a girl can come forward and say, ‘You raped me.’”
Osmeña also said party lines will not matter in the impeachment trial. With the mix of parties in the Senate, he said it will be difficult to get the numbers to convict Corona. He told the Philippine Star, “Nobody will be able to get the two-thirds vote. Only Manny Pacquiao can get that two-thirds vote.”
Yet he added, “Even if [Corona] wins with the other side not getting a two-thirds [vote], he is damaged. How can he continue to serve as Chief Justice?”
Age: 68
Education: Osmeña does not have a college degree but studied in schools like Harvard University, Georgetown University and the University of the Philippines. He is a farmer and businessman by training. He finished his high school from Beaumont College in England.
Senate work: Chairperson, Committee on Banks, Financial Institutions and Currencies
Terms: 3 (1995-2001; 2001-2007, 2010-2016)
Political Party: Independent
Osmeña comes from a family of politicians hailing from Cebu. His paternal grandfather, Sergio Sr. was president of the Philippines and former senator. His maternal grandfather, Esteban de la Rama, was also senator. Other senators in the family include his father, Sergio Jr., and cousin, John Henry.
Osmeña’s brother, Tomas, is representative of the second district of Cebu. Rep. Osmeña is a friend of former President Arroyo. He did not sign the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Renato Corona.
During martial law, Osmeña was imprisoned for five years. Along with fellow detainee Eugenio “Geny” Lopez Jr, he escaped from a maximum security jail in Fort Bonifacio.
Senate bloc:
Osmeña has been independent at the Senate, even grilling Aquino appointees at the Commission on Appointments. Still, some observers think the Aquino ally may side with the LP bloc consisting of Senators Franklin Drilon, Francis Pangilinan, Ralph Recto and Teofisto Guingona III.
Role in the Estrada impeachment trial:
Osmeña was among the senator-judges who voted to open the controversial second envelope allegedly containing incriminating evidence against Estrada. They were overruled, though, in an 11-10 vote. This led to a walkout of prosecutors and the People Power uprising that toppled Estrada.
In December 2011, he told ABS-CBN News, “Remember, in the impeachment trial of Joseph Estrada, we lost the vote but it was the public who said he was guilty.”
Position published or aired on Corona or on topics related to the Articles of Impeachment:
Even before Corona’s impeachment, Osmeña defended President Aquino’s criticism of the Supreme Court. While not mentioning Corona, the senator told ABS-CBN News that a majority of the Court is openly partisan toward Arroyo.
He said, “You cannot continue tolerating a court until they’re 70 and they’ve been appointed by Gloria. They have been so partial to Gloria that who’s going to stand up for the Filipino people?”
Osmeña said he supports the Aquino administration’s “overall goal to throw out crooks and corrupt people in government.”
He told the Inquirer, “Gloria Arroyo really abused her power. So, to cover up for all her corruption, she set up a lot of land mines. She put Merceditas Gutierrez in the Office of the Ombudsman, and Renato Corona and some funny guys in the Supreme Court. All of them.” -Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Press statements of Sen. Osmeña, Philippine Star, Philippine Daily Inquirer, ABS-CBN News
Source: rappler.com
Sen. Francis Escudero
Vetting justices
MANILA, Philippines - Sen. Francis Escudero, as a member of the vetting body for aspirants to the judiciary, voted to include Supreme Court Associate Justice Renato Corona in their shortlist for the post of Chief Justice in May 2010.
Escudero is the Senate representative in the Judicial and Bar Council (JBC), which screens and nominates contenders to posts in the judiciary. The JBC was put in a difficult spot in 2010 after another member, then Quezon City Rep. Matias Defensor, said that the council should start the selection process for Chief Justice amid an appointment ban.
The President is barred from making any appointments 2 months before the elections and up until her term ends on June 30, but the SC eventually ruled that the judiciary is exempted from this ban.
Before the Court ruled on the matter, Escudero said he expressed the hope that the JBC submit its shortlist after the High Tribunal rules on it. When it did, he said that he was “disappointed.”
In July 2011, allegations came out that Escudero accompanied retired Court of Appeals Justice Artemio Tuquero to a meeting with President Benigno Aquino III. Tuquero was one of the aspirants to the post of ombudsman then. Tuquero is a member of the powerful religious organization Iglesia ni Cristo, along with retired Supreme Court Justice Serafin Cuevas, Corona’s lead counsel in his impeachment trial.
Escudero also is a key ally of Vice President Jejomar Binay, who is fighting an electoral protest filed by Mar Roxas with the Presidential Electoral Tribunal that is headed by Corona.
Age: 42
Profession: A partner in the law firm Escudero, Marasigan, Sta. Ana, Vallente and Villareal Law Office.
Fraternity: Alpha Phi Beta. One of his fraternity brothers include retired SC Chief Justice Reynato Puno, Ramon Esguerra, one of Corona’s lawyers and spokespersons, and Roan Libarios, current president of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines. (The IBP has expressed its support for Corona).
Senate bloc: Escudero resigned from the Nationalist People’s Coalition in 2010. He is considered an administration ally, supporting then presidential candidate Benigno Aquino III in the 2010 elections. But Escudero endorsed then Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay for the vice-presidency, instead of backing Aquino’s running mate, Sen. Manuel ‘Mar’ Roxas. Roxas filed an electoral protest against Binay before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, which is also composed of the SC. The case is still pending.
Senate committee: Justice and Human Rights, Environment and Natural Resources
Senate term: First.(Escudero is up for re-election in 2013).
Political Party: Independent
Role in previous impeachments: Escudero, then an NPC member, signed the impeachment complaint against Chief Justice Hilario Davide in 2003. His partymates Rep. Gilbert Teodoro and Rep. Felix Fuentebella filed the complaint over the alleged malversation of the Judiciary Development Fund.
Corona’s purported refusal to account for the JDF and the special allowances for judges is the eighth article of impeachment.
Position aired and published on Corona and on issues related to the Articles of Impeachment:
He said Akbayan, a party-list group that supports Aquino, did not have the standing to ask Corona to inhibit from the cases involving former President and now Pampanga Rep. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo.
Akbayan urged Corona to inhibit from the cases questioning the constitutionality of the watch list order issued against Arroyo and the joint panel (composed of the Department of Justice and the Commission on Elections) which investigated her on charges of electoral sabotage.
Escudero agreed with the High Court’s issuance of a temporary restraining order enjoining the DOJ from enforcing its watch list order against Arroyo and her husband, Jose Miguel. Escudero said that what the DOJ should have done was to file a case against her with a court.
Palace insiders have said that Escudero tried to discourage President Aquino from pursuing the impeachment of Corona. - Rappler.com
Sources: www.newsbreak.ph, inquirer.net
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
Sen. Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos Jr
Honoring the Supreme Court
MANILA, Philippines - The neophyte senator is a staunch critic of both the Arroyo and Aquino administrations. Ironically, the son of former President Marcos describes President Aquino’s anti-Corona campaign as a form of dictatorship.
While Marcos has not voiced explicit views on the accusations against the impeached Chief Justice, his mother, Ilocos Norte Rep. Imelda Marcos, voted against the impeachment complaint filed against him.
The only son of former President Ferdinand Marcos and Imelda Marcos, Sen. Marcos continues to defend his father’s imposition of martial law. He has told reporters that indicators like poverty rate, the Philippines’ international status, and the government’s financial situation during his father’s regime show that the country had better days then.
Marcos said his father’s name helps him in politics. “I have been benefiting from the good will of my father …. I am so lucky that many still remember and love him.”
The solicitor general under the Marcos regime is Estelito Mendoza. A former lawyer of the Marcoses, Mendoza is the legal counsel of the Philippine Airlines and the 16 municipalities whose conversion into cityhood was criticized as unconstitutional. Mendoza wrote the SC to have both cases reopened even after the high court ruled on these with finality. These cases are cited in the impeachment complaint against Corona.
Age: 54
Education: BA Political Science, Philosophy and Economics, Oxford University; Masters in Business Administration, Wharton School of Business, University of Pennsylvania
Professional background: His career has been in politics. He served as representative of Ilocos Norte’s district for 9 years and then governor of the province for another 9 years. He ran for the Senate in 1995 but lost.
Senate term: One (2010-2016)
Political party: Nacionalista Party (NP)
Senate bloc:
Sen. Marcos is part of the NP bloc of Villar, which include senators Miriam Defensor Santiago, Joker Arroyo, Loren Legarda, Alan Peter Cayetano and Pia Cayetano.
Position aired or published on Corona or on issues related to the Articles of Impeachment:
Marcos criticized the Aquino administration for defying the TRO that the SC issued favoring Mrs Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. He was quoted as saying, “It is a dismay to see that orders of the Supreme Court are no longer respected or followed. This strikes at the very heart of our legal system and if the president and his alter ego … choose not to follow the SC then that is a very serious blow to the separation and equality of the different departments of government.”
Marcos also disagreed with the administration’s decision to bar Arroyo from traveling abroad, saying there are legal remedies to bring her back to the country if she escapes.
He called the administration’s handling of the Arroyo case “a bit of a mess” and said it should have filed cases against her early on. “The administration is and has been getting very personal. Kasama na rin kami doon (That also applies to our family).”
Marcos slammed President Aquino’s criticism of the Supreme Court, calling it “the flavor of the month excuse for the shortcomings of this administration.”
He told GMA News, “The problem with blaming or needing scapegoats is if say, the CJ is successfully removed from his office, does that make this administration any more competent than it is?”
Asked about Corona’s criticism of Aquino as a dictator, Marcos said, “I don’t know what the definition of dictatorship is but it would seem to be an attempt of the President to remove the co-equal status of the branches of government and make the executive more equal than others, which violates all the democratic principles we enshrined in our constitution.” - Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Website of Sen. Marcos, press statements of Sen. Marcos, Newsbreak, Philippine Star, Philippine Daily Inquirer, ABS-CBN News, GMA News, Yahoo News
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
Sen. Bong Revilla
Key Arroyo ally
MANILA, Philippines - The Revillas have been longtime allies of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.Former Sen. Ramon Revilla Sr. belonged to Arroyo’s party, Lakas-Kampi CMD. The wife of incumbent Sen. Ramon “Bong” Revilla Jr., Lani Mercado, who is the representative of Cavite’s second district, is also a member of Lakas-CMD-Kampi.
Bong Revilla is one Arroyo’s 2 partymates in the Senate; the other one is Sen. Lito Lapid. Revilla is the president of Lakas-Kampi-CMD, while Arroyo is its chairman emeritus.
Revilla ran under the administration-led Koalisyon ng Katapatan at Karanasan sa Kinabukasan in the 2004 senatorial elections. Prior to this, in 2002, he was appointed by Arroyo as chairman of the Videogram Regulatory Board.
Revilla, who was re-elected in 2010, has consistently defended the former President, who is now Pampanga representative.
He said the government should allow her to seek medical specialists on bone illnesses abroad, especially as no case has been filed against her yet. If they want to make sure she will return to the country, Revilla suggested that they provide her escorts.
His wife, Lani, abstained in the voting on the impeachment of Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez – an appointee of Arroyo – in 2011, saying she did not want to influence her husband’s decision. Gutierrez, however, later resigned.Last year, there were reports that Lakas was grooming Revilla to be its standard-bearer in the 2016 presidential race, when his term ends as a senator.
Age: 45
Education: Completed diploma courses on Special Local Chief Executive
Program On Local Governance and Philippine Legislative Institutions and Processes from the Development Academy of the Philippines
Profession: movie actor
Senate committee: Public services and public works
Senate term: 3 terms. The term ends in 2016.
Political party: Lakas-Kampi-CMD
Senate bloc: He belongs to the bloc of Sen. Edgardo Angara, which is composed of senators Lito Lapid, Gregorio Honasan, Loren Legarda and
Vicento Sotto.
Position published or aired on Corona or on issues contained in the Articles of Impeachment:
Revilla said the Department of Justice should have deferred to the SC when it issued a temporary restraining order enjoining the DOJ from
enforcing its travel ban against Arroyo and her husband, lawyer Jose Miguel.
“The Supreme Court was merely doing its job - that is to act upon a petition that has been brought to them for immediate action. As a lawyer herself, and as former Chair of the Commission on Human Rights, it is incumbent upon Sec. De Lima to protect the rights of all
Filipinos, even those of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo,” he said. - Rappler.com
Sources: www.senate.gov.ph, www.gmanews.tv, www.inquirer.net
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
Sen. Edgardo Angara:
Traumatized by impeachment
MANILA, Philippines - Lawyer groups are divided over the impeachment of Supreme Court Chief Justice Renato Corona. The Integrated Bar of the Philippines (1979) is against it, while the Philippine Bar Association (PBA) considers it as a “constitutionally ordained process which epitomizes the Rule of Law at work.”
Sen. Edgardo Angara had served as president of the two groups; the PBA in 1975 and the IBP in 1979.
But Angara does not think it’s wise to have an impeachment trial at all.
In December 2011, he warned that an impeachment trial, especially a prolonged one, would cause “schism” within the bureaucracy and the whole nation. “In the Philippines, the impeachment of former President Joseph Estrada has led to social division in the country, a political upheaval that has yet to fully heal,” he said in a statement published on Dec. 20, 2011 in Business Mirror.
Angara stood as a witness in the impeachment trial of Estrada, which began late 2000 and abruptly ended in January 2001. As Estrada’s Executive Secretary then, Angara testified that Estrada did not have a hand in the operation of bingo2ball, a legal version of jueteng, an illegal numbers game.
In the ongoing impeachment trial against Corona, however, Angara is not a witness but a judge. And in a twist of fate, his son, Aurora Rep. Juan ‘Sonny’ Edgardo Angara, is a member of the team from the House of Representatives that’s prosecuting Corona and is said to be eyeing a senatorial seat in 2013.
Age: 77
Education: Law, University of the Philippines; Masters of laws, University of Michigan
Professional background: Lawyer. A founding partner of ACCRA (Angara, Abello, Concepcion, Regala and Cruz) law office. Two of his former partners in that firm are Sen. Franklin Drilon and lawyer Francis Jardeleza, who is the new Deputy Ombudsman for Luzon.
Senate committee: Education, arts and culture
Senate term: 4th. His term ends in 2013.
Political Party: Laban ng Demokratikong Pilipino
Fraternity: Sigma Rho. His fraternity brothers include SC Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, fellow Senators Franklin Drilon, Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, and his son Rep. Angara
Pending case in SC: Anakpawis partylist Rep. Rafael Mariano and militant groups asked the SC to declare unconstitutional Republic Act Nos. 10083 and 9490, which created the Aurora Pacific Economic Zone and Freeport. Angara is one of the authors of the bill; he was not named as a respondent (his son was, though), but the groups said the older Angara should be asked to file his reply on the petition.
Senate bloc: The Angara bloc consists of Senators Loren Legarda, Ramon “Bong” Revilla, Jr. and Manuel “Lito” Lapid, Jr.
Position published or aired on Corona or on issues contained in the Articles of Impeachment:
He is against midnight appointments, saying that former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo should have allowed the incoming administration to replace her appointees.
Angara voted for the conversion of the 16 municipalities into cities, one of the cases where the SC flip-flopped on.
In 2006, he voted for the promotion of Dinagat island into a province – also one of the cases cited in the 5th article of impeachment against Corona. - Rappler.com
Sources: www.senate.gov.ph, www.inquirer.net, www.newsbreak.ph
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
Sen. Vicente ‘Tito’ Sotto III
Court commander
MANILA, Philippines - While Sotto has been silent on Corona, he was vocal in criticizing the Aquino administration’s efforts to bar the Arroyos from leaving the country. A former chair of the Dangerous Drugs Board (DDB) under the Arroyo government, Sotto belongs to a party and bloc whose members in the Senate have yet to come up with a unified stand on the issue.
In 2007, Sotto ran under the Arroyo administration’s Team Unity senatorial ticket. He lost the election. In 2008, Mrs Arroyo then named him chair of the DDB.
Sotto, however, was implicated in a drugs controversy in 1997. The Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism reported that he was accused of harboring links with drug lord Alfredo Tiongco, who allegedly financed his 1992 senatorial campaign. Sotto denied any ties but admitted that he sought police protection for Tiongco who he said approached him after allegedly receiving death threats.
Sotto chose to take his oath of office before Corona in July 2010.
Age: 63
Education: AB English, Colegio de San Juan de Letran
Senate committee: Senate Majority Leader, Chairperson of the Committee on Rules
(As chairman of the Committee on Rules, Sotto helped finalize the rules for the impeachment trial. He moved to convene the Senate as an impeachment court.)
Senate term: Three (1992-2004; 2010-2016)
Political Party: Nationalist People’s Coalition (NPC)
Senate bloc:
Observers say that Sotto is part of the bloc of Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile. The Philippine Star reported that the other members of the bloc are Senators Jinggoy Estrada and Gregorio Honasan.
Role in the Estrada impeachment trial:
In 2001, Sotto was among 11 senators who voted against opening the controversial second envelope allegedly containing incriminating evidence against then President Joseph Estrada. The senators argued that the envelope was inadmissible because it was not included in the impeachment complaint. That vote triggered a walk-out in the Senate and the People Power uprising that ousted Estrada.
Sotto told the Inquirer in December 2011, “People thought the vote against the envelope was a favor to the former president. And of course, we all know the consequences that followed.”
Position aired or published on Corona and on issues related to the Articles of Impeachment:
Before the SC issued the TRO, Sotto criticized the Justice Department’s watch list order against the Arroyos as illegal. He said allegations that former President Arroyo will try to flee the country are baseless.
He said in a statement in November 2011, “How can you make someone accountable for something you have not charged her with in court? Their (Aquino administration) arguments raised is a fallacy of non sequitur, it does not follow, it lacks causal connection.”
Sotto then scored Justice Secretary Leila de Lima for defying the temporary restraining order the Supreme Court issued when she barred the Arroyos from leaving the country. “Mali na nga from the start, pinaninindigan pa (It was wrong from the start but they refuse to change their stand). Now, they’re getting a dose of their own medicine. Immaturity and recklessness, that’s the kind of message they seem to be trying to send now to the public.”
Speaking on the TRO, he said, “The High Court has already spoken, the right to travel cannot be curtailed. That is a constitutionally-guaranteed right of every Filipino. And judging from what happened, GMA is not prohibited from traveling even when the SC decision is under appeal.” - Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Official website of Sen. Vicente Sotto III, Press statements of Sen. Sotto, Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism, Philippine Star, The Philippine Daily Inquirer
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
No to midnight appointment
MANILA, Philippines - In 2002, Sen. Francis ‘Kiko’ Pangilinan voted for Renato Corona’s appointment to the Supreme Court.
Pangilinan was then a member of the Judicial and Bar Council, which screens and vets aspirants for the judiciary before they are chosen by the President. The body voted unanimously to include Corona in the JBC shortlist.
Eight years after, in February 2010, Pangilinan signed a resolution saying that then President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo should not make a “midnight” appointment of a Chief Justice. The President is prohibited from making any appointments 2 months before the elections up until her term ends on June 30 (until the SC eventually ruled otherwise). Corona had by then just accepted his nomination for the position of SC Chief Justice.
Among those who introduced the resolution were Pangilinan’s partymates from the Liberal Party: then Sen. Benigno Aquino III, and senators Rodolfo Biazon and Manuel Roxas. They were joined by senators Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano, Gregorio Honasan, Jamby Madrigal, Aquilino Pimentel, Antonio Trillanes IV, Jinggoy Estrada and Edgardo Angara.
Age: 48
Education: Bachelor of Arts in English, Major in Comparative Literature, UP; Law, UP; Masters in Public Administration at the John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University
Professional background: Lawyer. He is a senior partner in Franco, Pangilinan, Tolentino, Ringler and Santo law offices, but is on leave.
Fraternity: Upsilon Sigma Phi
Senate committee: agriculture and food, and social justice, welfare and development
Senate term: 2nd (2001-2007, 2007-2013)
Political party: Liberal Party
Senate bloc: He belongs to the LP bloc composed of Senators Franklin Drilon, Ralph Recto and Teofisto Guingona III.
Position published or aired on Corona or on issues contained in the articles of impeachment:
After the Commission on Elections filed a case of electoral sabotage against Arroyo on Nov.18, Pangilinan said the high court should recall the temporary restraining order it issued enjoining the Department of Justice from enforcing its watch list order against Arroyo.
Pangilinan, like Drilon, has asked Corona to inhibit from cases involving Arroyo.
Citing the High Tribunal’s reversal on various cases (Article 3), Pangilinan said the High Court had brought “destabilization” on itself.
Pangilinan is one of the authors of Republic Act 9227, which provided special allowances to judges. The alleged failure of Corona to account for the special allowances is the eighth article of impeachment. - Rappler.com
Sources: www.kiko.ph, www.senate.gov.ph, www.gmanews.tv
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
![Sen. Ralph Recto
Will he toe party line?
MANILA, Philippines - The Arroyo Cabinet member-turned-Aquino ally is not as critical of Corona and the Supreme Court as his fellow Liberal Party members. The economist has even opposed government’s defiance of the court. It remains to be seen if Recto will vote along party lines in Corona’s impeachment trial.
Recto believes the political instability resulting from Corona’s impeachment trial may drive away investors.
He told the Philippine Star, “Who will commit resources in this country [in 2012] if they know there is instability of some sort, political [instability]? The executive and the Supreme Court are clashing. This is not good.”
In 2007, Recto ran for senator under Arroyo’s Team Unity coalition. He lost the polls, with analysts attributing his defeat to his authorship of the Expanded Value Added Tax (EVAT) law. Before running for the Senate, Recto was a three-term congressman, representing the fourth district of Batangas.
Age: 48
Education:
Masters in Strategic Business Economics, University of Asia and the Pacific
Masters in Public Administration, University of the Philippines
BS Commerce, Major in Business Administration, De La Salle University
Profession:
Senate term: Two (2001-2007; 2010-2016)
Political Party: Liberal Party (LP)
Recto joined the LP senatorial ticket for the 2010 elections. He became a member of the LP after he and wife, Batangas Gov. Vilma Santos-Recto, bolted the Lakas party of then President Arroyo. The Recto couple was among many Arroyo allies who shifted to the LP during the 2010 campaign.
Recto decided to support then Sen. Benigno Aquino III in 2010 even if he is a close friend of another presidential candidate, Sen. Manny Villar.
Senate bloc:
Recto belongs to the LP bloc, which also includes Senators Franklin Drilon, Francis Pangilinan and Teofisto Guingona III. In his first term at the Senate, Recto was part of the so-called Wednesday group composed of Senators Villar, Joker Arroyo, Pangilinan and former Vice President Noli de Castro.
Position aired and published on Corona or the articles of impeachment
On alleged midnight appointment as chief justice (Article 1)
As a senatorial candidate in March 2010, Recto called on Arroyo “to forfeit her right of appointing a new Chief Justice.” He said allowing her successor to make the appointment will be a classy act of saying goodbye.
“That way she will score a double victory: legally, in the bench, and morally, in the bar of public opinion. There is no gesture more noble than in refusing to exercise a power that is yours,” said Recto.
Recto warned of anarchy resulting from a constitutional crisis after the Justice Department defied the TRO.
He told ABS-CBN and Interaksyon, “Niyurakan nila ang batas. Gulo iyan. Nananawagan ako, sundin natin ang batas.” (They trampled on the law. That means disorder. I call on the government to follow the law.) - Ayee Macaraig/Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Website of Sen. Recto, press statements of Sen. Recto, Philippine Star, Philippine Daily Inquirer, GMA News, ABS-CBN News, Interaksyon](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lz0wlucpoz1qa1c6so1_500.jpg)
Sen. Ralph Recto
Will he toe party line?
MANILA, Philippines - The Arroyo Cabinet member-turned-Aquino ally is not as critical of Corona and the Supreme Court as his fellow Liberal Party members. The economist has even opposed government’s defiance of the court. It remains to be seen if Recto will vote along party lines in Corona’s impeachment trial.
Recto believes the political instability resulting from Corona’s impeachment trial may drive away investors.
He told the Philippine Star, “Who will commit resources in this country [in 2012] if they know there is instability of some sort, political [instability]? The executive and the Supreme Court are clashing. This is not good.”
In 2007, Recto ran for senator under Arroyo’s Team Unity coalition. He lost the polls, with analysts attributing his defeat to his authorship of the Expanded Value Added Tax (EVAT) law. Before running for the Senate, Recto was a three-term congressman, representing the fourth district of Batangas.
Age: 48
Education:
Masters in Strategic Business Economics, University of Asia and the Pacific
Masters in Public Administration, University of the Philippines
BS Commerce, Major in Business Administration, De La Salle University
Profession:
Senate term: Two (2001-2007; 2010-2016)
Political Party: Liberal Party (LP)
Recto joined the LP senatorial ticket for the 2010 elections. He became a member of the LP after he and wife, Batangas Gov. Vilma Santos-Recto, bolted the Lakas party of then President Arroyo. The Recto couple was among many Arroyo allies who shifted to the LP during the 2010 campaign.
Recto decided to support then Sen. Benigno Aquino III in 2010 even if he is a close friend of another presidential candidate, Sen. Manny Villar.
Senate bloc:
Recto belongs to the LP bloc, which also includes Senators Franklin Drilon, Francis Pangilinan and Teofisto Guingona III. In his first term at the Senate, Recto was part of the so-called Wednesday group composed of Senators Villar, Joker Arroyo, Pangilinan and former Vice President Noli de Castro.
Position aired and published on Corona or the articles of impeachment
On alleged midnight appointment as chief justice (Article 1)
As a senatorial candidate in March 2010, Recto called on Arroyo “to forfeit her right of appointing a new Chief Justice.” He said allowing her successor to make the appointment will be a classy act of saying goodbye.
“That way she will score a double victory: legally, in the bench, and morally, in the bar of public opinion. There is no gesture more noble than in refusing to exercise a power that is yours,” said Recto.
Recto warned of anarchy resulting from a constitutional crisis after the Justice Department defied the TRO.
He told ABS-CBN and Interaksyon, “Niyurakan nila ang batas. Gulo iyan. Nananawagan ako, sundin natin ang batas.” (They trampled on the law. That means disorder. I call on the government to follow the law.) - Ayee Macaraig/Rappler.com
Sources: Senate website, Website of Sen. Recto, press statements of Sen. Recto, Philippine Star, Philippine Daily Inquirer, GMA News, ABS-CBN News, Interaksyon
Source: rappler.com
Photo with 1 note
Sen. Aquilino ‘Koko’ Pimentel III
New kid on the block
MANILA, Philippines - Sen. Koko Pimentel’s complaint accusing former President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and her husband, lawyer Jose Miguel, of electoral sabotage in the 2007 senatorial elections, is one of the cases that triggered the issuance of a watch list order against the two.
The Department of Justice barred the Arroyo couple from leaving the country in October 2011, but the Supreme Court issued a temporary restraining order stopping the DOJ from implementing the order. The issuance of the TRO is now one of the Articles of Impeachment against Chief Justice Renato Corona.
Pimentel accused the Arroyo couple of having a hand in the reported election cheating in Maguindanao and Lanao del Norte, which resulted in a 12-0 sweep of administration candidates in the 2007 senatorial race. Pimentel filed an electoral protest against Sen. Juan Miguel Zubiri – who led him by some 19,000 votes - in 2007.
In 2008, the Senate electoral tribunal, composed of SC Justices Leonardo Quisumbing (now retired), Antonio Carpio, Corona, Senators Edgardo Angara, Pia Cayetano, Panfilo Lacson, Ramon Revilla Jr., Francis Escudero and Benigno Aquino III ruled that there was sufficient ground to proceed with the electoral protest.
In 2011, Zubiri resigned and Pimentel was declared as the newest member of the 23-member Senate. In a previous interview with Newsbreak, Pimentel said that his allies in the Senate include Senators Sergio Osmeña III, Francis Escudero, Alan Peter, Pia Cayetano and Antonio Trillanes IV.
He ran for mayor of Cagayan de Oro in 2001 but lost.
Age:47
Education: Finished BS Mathematics in Ateneo, completed law in the University of the Philippines.
Professional background: A bar topnotcher in 1990, Pimentel has his own law firm, the Aquilino Pimentel III law office.
Senate term: He will finish Zubiri’s term; up for re-election in 2013
Senate committee: Chairperson, Committee on electoral reforms and people’s participation, member, Senate committee on accountability of public officers and investigations,
Senate bloc: In a previous interview with Newsbreak, Pimentel said his allies in the Senate are Senators Sergio Osmeña III (who was him in PDP-Laban’s senatorial ticket in 2007), Francis Escudero, Alan Peter and Pia Cayetano and Antonio Trillanes IV.
Pending cases before SC: Pimentel filed a motion for reconsideration on the SC ruling declaring RA 10153, the law postponing the elections in the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao from 2011 to 2013, constitutional.
One of Pimentel’s key allies, Vice President Jejomar Binay, has a pending election case before the Presidential Electoral Tribunal, which is composed also of the SC. Aquino’s ally, now Transport and Communications Secretary Manuel Roxas III, filed an electoral protest against Binay, who defeated him in the 2010 elections for the post of vice president. Pimentel is president of PDP-Laban; Binay, is the party chairperson.
Published and aired position on Corona or on issues contained in the articles of impeachment.
In an interview with Inquirer, Pimentel said that he “unequivocally” supports Justice Secrertary Leila de Lima for barring Arroyo from leaving the country.
“She should be commended instead of reproached for upholding justice and the rule of law,” he told Inquirer.
He also said the SC should not hold De Lima in contempt for continuing to enforce the watch list order even as the high court has issued a TRO. De Lima served as Pimentel’s counsel in his electoral protest against Zubiri. - Rappler.com
Sources: Newsbreak, Philppine Daily Inquirer, www.senate.gov.ph, www.pimentelprotest.ph
Source: rappler.com
Page 1 of 2
