Archive for May, 2012
It is predicted that the civil war in Syria will be catastrophic.
It is also confirmed that Russia is sending weapons and armaments to the government forces of President Assad.
The financial crises in Europe has weakened Nato and it might not be able to mount a police action on Assad.
It would not be advisable for the world powers to start a military action against Assad. Russia has a veto power in the UN.
I would imagine a unified Arab League-Mossad clandestine operation using drones might do.
To eliminate conflicting interpretations regarding the SALN and the FCD laws, the existing laws must be harmonized, synchronized, merged, amalgamated, or whatever the Senators may deem necessary to fix the problem.
If the Senators decide to amend the existing laws to plainly require everybody to declare their dollar deposits, an AMNESTY clause must be included in the new amendment laws to provide immunity from litigations for those who have had undeclared dollar deposits prior to the said amendments. Otherwise, ………
The Senate Impeachment Court rendered its verdict:
20 to convict
3 to acquit
Et tu Brute,
then fall, Caesar!
The individual comments to explain their votes
proved the mettle of the senators,
why they were elected,
and why they will be re-elected.
Should 16 Senators of the Corona Impeachment Court convict the Chief Justice, the defense panel said they will appeal to the Supreme Court because of a mistrial.
This would be good for the country in that whatever decision that the Senate Impeachment Court made would be confirmed.
If their decision is upturned, then it would be a learning experience, unless the prosecutors are not sure of themselves.
Trying the Corona case would ideally be in the Supreme Court, where the atmosphere is quarantined from the pork barrel.
Personally, I am dying to see how the prosecution’s logic would stand up in a real trial court situation.
Considering the very short time given to prepare a rebuttal, Dennis Manalo comes through with this stinging rebuke of the prosecution’s oral arguments. He gets to it point by point, relying on proven and certified evidence presented to the court as against unreliable, unverified, illegally collected evidence from the prosecution.
The first oral argument from Corona’s defense comes from the scholarly Eduardo de los Angeles.
In his exhaustive treatise of the SALN and its expediencies Counsel Eduardo de los Angeles provided the meat and gist of Corona’s SALN defense, referring to cases and quotes which the prosecution was unable to refute nor challenge. This was an amazing demonstration of technical expertise, fluid in presentation, and direct to the argumentative points.
It is probable that only a few of the Senators and more of the prosecution panel followed his oral arguments due to its deep technical immersion. They were irresistible, and Corona could have won the SALN case on these arguments alone.
“What is the meaning of culpa in Roman law?”
Cuevas said he was probably absent when this was taught.
He could have asked any of the defense counsels to answer this question for him.
But, as if rehearsed, Prosecutor Farinas comes out to define culpable as
‘willfull and intentional violation of the law’
“Is there the word intent on culpable violation?”
Maybe not, and conversely,
is there the word dollar in the SALN form?
Now this is getting funnier by the question. Culpable means guilty or blameworthy. Corona, in his capacity as chief interpreter of the Constitution, does not believe that he is guilty nor blameworthy. From this line of questioning by Enrile, it is now presumed that he has joined the people who are ganging up on the Chief Justice.
All the more need to call for a mistrial. Or an appeal to the Supreme Court. At least in this venue, the Chief Justice will be tried by his peers, nonetheless.
“What injury will be caused if a public official with foreign currency deposits would declare that deposit in his SALN?”
The resulting injury as a consequence of a decision does not necessarily dictate the matter of choice by which the decision was made.
Enrile presumes from this question that an injurious result would happen if the dollar deposit is not declared in the SALN.
Contrary to his presumption, Corona believes that no injurious result would happen if the dollar deposit is not declared in the SALN.
It is a matter of choice resulting from analyses of the legal situation.
Whether it would be injurious or not, it is still a matter of choice.