GLORIOUS DAY FOR THE SUPREME COURT OF THE PHILIPPINES UNDER CHIEF JUSTICE LOURDES SERENO (21 April 2015)

SC scolds Binay lawyers for ‘wrong doctrine’

Tarra Quismundo, Vincent Cabreza | Inquirer Northern Luzon 2:42 AM | Wednesday, April 22nd, 2015

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/687005/sc-scolds-binay-lawyers-for-wrong-doctrine#ixzz3XyR3srPY

A+

Supreme Court Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno       RAFFY LERMA

BAGUIO CITY, Philippines—Why should reelection effectively absolve an official from administrative liability? Or put another way, isn’t it about time that a doctrine that gives erring officials a clean slate once they are reelected be abandoned?
Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno gave the lawyers of Makati City Mayor Junjun Binay a dressing down during the second round of oral arguments on Tuesday on the power of Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales to suspend the Makati mayor, scolding the Binay lawyers for insisting that an official, once reelected, may no longer be made to answer for administrative violations.
In a lengthy and heated exchange with Binay lawyer Sandra Marie Olaso-Coronel, an obviously incensed Sereno confronted her former law student with the possible implications of her argument that the doctrine of condonation covers the Makati mayor.
“This is the kind of legal regime you want us to propagate? We believe that this is wrong and you are telling us to continue along that doctrine?” Sereno told Coronel in an interpellation that lasted for more than an hour.
Coronel could barely respond.
“You will insist on a rule of procedure that will wreak havoc on our constitutional framework?” Sereno said, as she reminded Coronel that as a professor at the University of the Philippines College of Law, she taught her students the virtue of honesty and integrity.
Affront to Constitution
Sereno, a known advocate of clean governance and honest public service, considered the Binay camp’s position an affront to the Constitution and to future generations of Filipinos, and the kind of governance that jurisprudence would allow.
“It is the duty of this court to promote honesty and integrity in public service, because the Constitution is, first and foremost, our most important document and covenant that we must uphold,” she said.
“Because if we uphold your theory, we are basically going to say, with respect to all those laws, those offenses and those penalties, they cannot apply to reelected officials. That is what you’re asking us to do,” Sereno said.
The principle invoked by the Binay lawyers—which Sereno described as an “unfortunate doctrine … based on bad case law”—effectively extinguishes a reelected official’s administrative liability from alleged wrongdoing during a previous term.
The doctrine emanates from a 1959 case involving the mayor of San Jose, Nueva Ecija province, in which the Supreme Court ruled, based on American jurisprudence, that the mayor was to be effectively absolved from administrative charges by virtue of reelection.
Binay’s lawyers invoked the doctrine to challenge a March 11 order from the Ombudsman putting Binay under preventive suspension pending an investigation into his alleged involvement in the irregularities in the construction of the Makati parking building.
The Court of Appeals stopped Morales’ suspension order with a temporary restraining order on March 16, prompting the Ombudsman to raise to the high court her jurisdictional conflict with the appellate court.
Doctrine outdated
Sereno was joined by Associate Justices Antonio Carpio and Estela Perlas-Bernabe in raising the possibility of reviewing the condonation doctrine.
The Chief Justice said the Ombudsman-Binay case that is before the court now was “a chance to make up.”
“So if we want to fight corruption, this court will have to make a strong stand for honesty and integrity,” she said.
Carpio said the 1959 doctrine was established under the guidance of the 1935 Constitution, suggesting that it may be outdated.
But Binay’s lawyers said the high court was barred from even reviewing this doctrine.
“The opportunity to revisit the doctrine of condonation will have to await a proper case filed before this court … when an error of judgment is alleged in an appeal,” Coronel said.
Much stricter
But Carpio said the power to condone is a constitutional power of the President.
“We should revisit it because the power to pardon in administrative cases is a constitutional power of the President, which we cannot usurp. So it’s a good ground to revisit that doctrine,” he said.
Carpio said the foundation of the doctrine was the 1935 Constitution, but the 1987 Constitution has become much stricter about public accountability.
He cited Article XI of the 1987 Constitution, which stipulates that “public officers and employees must, at all times, be accountable to the people, serve them with utmost responsibility, integrity, loyalty and efficiency; act with patriotism and justice, and lead modest lives.”
Carpio said this provision meant that “public officials can be accountable at all times,” even after the end of their service.
“The issue now is, ‘Can this court say to the people of Makati that we are granting [them] the power to pardon? Can we do that?” he asked.
The 1959 doctrine says the high court has done so, Carpio said, so “we should probably review it.”
20 times judiciary budget
The last to interpellate in the four-hour-long oral arguments on Tuesday, Sereno directed both the lawyers of Binay and the Ombudsman to “measure the condonation doctrine” against “the Filipino soul.”
Sereno showed a 63-page slide show, breaking down all the evidence that the Ombudsman has so far gathered against Binay, laws governing administrative liabilities of local government officials, and jurisprudence on administrative cases against local officials.
In her presentation, Sereno also cited the magnitude of public funds that local officials handle—P389.8 billion for disbursement this year and P341.5 billion in 2014—and the kind of impact that condonation would have if officials were allowed to get off easy by virtue of this doctrine.
“Do you imagine the magnitude of that money? That is nearly 20 times [the budget] of the entire judiciary,” she said.
“We’re talking about the magnitude of the problem we’re facing here. The social impact the message is saying is very important for the life of this country,” Sereno said.
Binay absent
Associate Justice Marvic Leonen questioned Binay’s absence in Tuesday’s proceedings.
“Why is Mayor Binay not here to face the highest court? The Ombudsman was here last week. Is there a reason he doesn’t care to appear?” Leonen asked lawyer Claro Certeza.
“It’s not a matter of him not caring,” replied Certeza.
“Is it not an indication of his interest also as to the results of this case? Or the respect for this court?” Leonen said.
“I’m definitely sure our client respects the court,” Certeza said.
The lawyer said he believed there was no order requiring the Makati mayor’s presence.
Morales appeared last week during the first round of oral arguments on her petition against Binay’s plea against his suspension before the Court of Appeals, even taking questions from justices.
Ill-prepared lawyer
Leonen also noted how ill-prepared Certeza was to tackle questions about the Ombudsman’s supplemental petition, which was filed on Monday last week to update the petition after the appellate court’s issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction, extending the temporary restraining order (TRO) it earlier issued.
“I’m sorry but I would have expected more from you having heard you speak in the media, seeming to be prepared to argue on all points,” Leonen told Certeza.
The magistrate also cited how Binay’s “refusal” to comply with the suspension order caused confusion in Makati City.
“Then it was your client that caused it all. No, not your client. It was your legal advice,” said Leonen, correcting himself.
Certeza disagreed and said: “We take exception, with due respect, your honor.”
3 justices recused
Three more magistrates joined Associate Justice Diosdado Peralta in recusing themselves from the case for undisclosed reasons.
These were Associate Justices Arturo Brion, Presbitero Velasco Jr. and Francis Jardeleza, who were all present during the oral arguments last week. The latter two even interpellated Acting Solicitor General Florin Hilbay who represented Morales.
The high court gave the two sides a nonextendable period of 30 days to file their memoranda on the case, their last chance to persuade the magistrates.

Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/687005/sc-scolds-binay-lawyers-for-wrong-doctrine#ixzz3XyRJVrvv

BBL BLOCK GRANT, aka, 70 BILLION ANNUAL BBL BUDGET

BBL BLOCK GRANT, aka, 70 BILLION ANNUAL BBL BUDGET . A lot of questions have been generated by the 70 billion annual budget in the proposed Bangsamoro Basic Law. Actually, in the proposed BBL, there's no mention of exact amount of 70 billion annually. What's mentioned is a BLOCK GRANT specially discussed in Art. XII, Secs. 15 to 21 of the BBL. The said sections say that the BLOCK GRANT is : “…no case to be less than the last budget received by the ARMM immediately before the establishment of the Bangsamoro Transition Authority” (Sec. 15). Then, Section 16 speaks of the "Formula of the Block Grant. – For the budget year immediately following the year this Act takes effect, the amount of the block grant shall be equivalent to four per cent (4%) of the net national internal revenue collection of the Bureau of Internal Revenue less the internal revenue allotment of local government units."
As a taxpayer, and as one Mindanawon who's also been conscientiously supportive of the peace process, maybe just to assuage all the apprehensions, doubts, and fears of all parties concerned, and also in the name of TRANSPARENCY, ACCOUNTABILITY, and SOCIAL JUSTICE, will it be too much if I'd request a FULL-BLOWN ITEMIZED BUDGET PROPOSAL of the said Block Grant? Anyway, this will also eventually be REQUIRED if indeed the Bangsamoro Basic Law will be passed, as required of ALL GOVERNMENT BODIES. With the ITEMIZED BUDGET, we taxpayers will at least, via paper, be assured that we know where our hard-earned taxes will go. Just saying, because as of the moment, without the said ITEMIZED BUDGET, what the BBL practically provides is for the central government to issue a check, then what happens to that will as if be a matter of conjectures. What I don't want to happen is to have a REPEAT of the NAPOLES-SCAM, DAP brouhaha, etc. via the BBL-BLOCK GRANT. At least if such ITEMIZED BUDGET be on paper NOW, both parties, government and MILF, are held ACCOUNTABLE, TRANSPARENT, and SOCIALLY JUST re this fiscal provision of the BBL.

SLEEPING JOSEPH, AKA DREAMING JOSEPH, NOT FOR ONESELF, BUT FOR OTHERS

SLEEPING JOSEPH, AKA DREAMING JOSEPH, NOT FOR ONESELF, BUT FOR OTHERS. Though rest is important, but the the most significant point of the Sleeping St. Joseph's figure is that through his sleep he DREAMT of God's will for him, specially when he was contemplating of abandoning, divorcing the infanticipating Blessed Mary, with a child which wasn't his. Because he slept, thus he dreamt of the Angel telling him about the truth of Mother Mary's pregnancy. During their time, a women who gets pregnant without a father, especially if she's already bethrothed to a man who's not the father of the child she's carrying, can have very tragic consequences for the pregnant woman. She can be accused of adultery, whose punishment is stoning to death. But because through his dream, understanding and accepting God's will, Joseph understood the real situation of Mary. So, instead of abandoning her, instead of condemning her, Joseph became the defender, the loyal husband to Mary, and a loyal father too to Jesus.
Come to think of it, St. Joseph himself actually became the enfleshment of the earlier Joseph, the-Dreamer of Egypt of the Old Testament. The similarities of the two Josephs actually are striking. Firstly, both had fathers whose names were Jacob. Both also became rescuers to those whose lives were entrusted to them: St. Joseph for Mary and Jesus; Old Testament Joseph, the Israelites who were then undergoing famine. Thirdly, both brought those whom they rescued to Egypt. St. Joseph brought Mother Mary and the baby Jesus to Egypt to escape the rampage of murderous Herod; OT Joseph brought into Egypt the Israelites who were going through a devastating 7-year cycle of famine. Lastly, and most importantly, both learned of God's will via their dreams, and also decided to follow God's will as expressed in their dreams.  Thus, we we actually have not only one, but two JOSEPHS THE DREAMERS. Dreamers, NOT for their own sakes, but following GOD'S WILL, FOR OTHERS.

Pope Francis’ speech at Malacañang (Full text)

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I thank you, Mr President, for your kind welcome and for your words of greeting in the name of  the authorities and people of the Philippines, and the distinguished members of the Diplomatic Corps. I am most grateful for your invitation to visit the Philippines.

My visit is above all pastoral.

It comes as the Church in this country is preparing to celebrate the fifth centenary of the first proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ on these shores. The Christian message has had an immense influence on Filipino culture.

It is my hope that this important anniversary will point to its continuing fruitfulness and its  potential to inspire a society worthy of the goodness, dignity and aspirations of the Filipino people.

In a particular way, this visit is meant to express my closeness to our brothers and sisters who endured the suffering, loss and devastation caused by Typhoon Yolanda.

Together with many people throughout the world, I have admired the heroic strength, faith and resilience demonstrated by so many Filipinos in the face of this natural disaster, and so many others.

Those virtues, rooted not least in the hope and solidarity instilled by Christian faith, gave rise to an outpouring of goodness and generosity, especially on the part of so many of the young. In that moment of national crisis, countless people came to the aid of their neighbors in need.

At great sacrifice, they gave of their time and resources, creating networks of mutual help and working for the common good.

This example of solidarity in the work of rebuilding teaches us an important lesson. Like a family, every society draws on its deepest resources in order to face new challenges.

Today the Philippines, together with many other countries in Asia, faces the challenge of building on solid foundations a modern society – a society respectful of authentic human values, protective of our God-given human dignity and rights, and ready to confront new and complex political and ethical questions.

As many voices in your nation have pointed out, it is now, more than ever, necessary that political leaders be outstanding for honesty, integrity and commitment to the common good. In this way they will help preserve the rich human and natural resources with which God has blessed this country.

Thus will they be able to marshall the moral resources needed to face the demands of the present, and to pass on to coming generations a society of authentic justice, solidarity and peace.

 Essential to the attainment of these national goals is the moral imperative of ensuring social justice and respect for human dignity. The great biblical tradition enjoins on all peoples the duty to hear the voice of the poor.

It bids us break the bonds of injustice and oppression which give rise to glaring, and indeed scandalous, social inequalities. Reforming the social structures which perpetuate poverty and the exclusion of the poor first requires a conversion of mind and heart.

The Bishops of the Philippines have asked that this year be set aside as the “Year of the Poor.”

I hope that this prophetic summons will challenge everyone, at all levels of society, to reject every form of corruption which diverts resources from the poor, and to make concerted efforts to ensure the inclusion of every man and woman and child in the life of the community.

 A fundamental role in the renewal of society is played, of course, by the family and especially by young people.

A highlight of my visit will be my meetings with families and with young people here in Manila.

Families have an indispensable mission in society. It is in the family that children are trained in sound values, high ideals and genuine concern for others.

But like all God’s gifts, the family can also be disfigured and destroyed. It needs our support. We know how difficult it is for our democracies today to preserve and defend such basic human values as respect for the inviolable dignity of each human person, respect for the rights of conscience and religious freedom, and respect for the inalienable right to life, beginning with that of the unborn and extending to that of the elderly and infirm.

For this reason, families and local communities must be encouraged and assisted in their efforts to transmit to our young the values and the vision which can help bring about a culture of integrity – one which honors goodness, truthfulness, fidelity and solidarity as the firm foundation and the moral glue which holds society together.

 Mr President, distinguished authorities, dear friends:

 As I begin my visit to this country, I cannot fail to mention the Philippines’ important role in fostering understanding and cooperation among the countries of Asia.

I would also mention the oft-neglected yet real contribution of Filipinos of the diaspora to the life and welfare of the societies in which they live.

It is precisely in the light of the rich cultural and religious heritage of which your country is proud that I leave you with a challenge and a word of prayerful encouragement.

May the deepest spiritual values of the Filipino people continue to find expression in your efforts to provide your fellow citizens with an integral human development.

In this way, each person will be able to fulfill his or her potential, and thus contribute wisely and well to the future of this country.

I am confident that the praiseworthy efforts to promote dialogue and cooperation between the followers of the different religions will prove fruitful in the pursuit of this noble goal.

In a particular way, I express my trust that the progress made in bringing peace to the south of the country will result in just solutions in accord with the nation’s founding principles and respectful of the inalienable rights of all, including the indigenous peoples and religious minorities.

 Upon all of you, and upon all the men, women and children of this beloved nation, I cordially  invoke God’s abundant blessings.
http://www.gmanetwork.com/news/popefrancis/story/406413/full-text-pope-francis-speech-at-malacanang

POPE FRANCIS, ROCKSTAR.

POPE FRANCIS, ROCKSTAR. People think that Pope Francis is so well-embraced globally that his popularity is likened to that of a rockstar. Some though cringe at the label, because they think that it's too worldly, too un-Popelike. On the contrary, it's not. It's in fact a very apt label. Peter, the first Pope was himself told by Christ, "You are Peter, the ROCK. And on this ROCK, will I build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." Thus, the Pope (all the Popes, that is), stood for That ROCK, the CHURCH of JESUS the CHRIST. Thus the word ROCK isn't at all worldly but in fact a very proper title for the Pope. Now, the STAR. There is That STAR of Christ, which shone not for itself, but shone so as to LEAD PEOPLE TO CHRIST. That's how the Magis, shepherds, animals found the new-born Christ in the manger. Indeed Francis, the STAR, has consistently been shining, but he has also been consistently telling people that the brightness is not for his own sake, but for people to be led towards for whom the STAR SHINES: CHRIST. Indeed, Pope Francis, who stands for the PAPACY, is ROCK, and also as one leading people to CHRIST is a STAR. Thus, POPE FRANCIS, ROCKSTAR!

ISN'T THIS SKYHIGH ROBBERY? CEBU PACIFIC AIR DOESN'T REFUND UNUSED TICKET, UNLIKE PAL WHICH WILL REFUND 100%.

CEBU PAC DOESN'T REFUND UNUSED TICKET, UNLIKE PAL WHICH WILL REFUND 100%. ISN'T THIS SKYHIGH ROBBERY? Yesterday, I got another surprise from CebuPac. PAL WILL REFUND MY UNUSED/SELF-CANCELLED TICKET 100%, WHILE CEBU PAC WON'T. Last Sunday afternoon, I decided to get round-trip tickets (in cash) for an anticipated very important business appointment in Makati for 13 January, today. Due to the cancellation of multiple flights of PAL and Cebu Pac for the upcoming Papal Visit, the flight schedules prior and after 15 & 19 January are also awry. I eventually ended up getting tickets from BOTH PAL & Cebu Pac (Dva-Mla, PAL; Mla-Dvo, CebuPac). However, yesterday, I got official instruction that I don't need to proceed to my appointment in Makati anymore. So I frantically contacted PAL and Cebu Pac for cancellation and reimbursement of my flights. ENDING: PAL WILL REFUND MY FARE 100%; Cebu Pac WILL NOT REFUND MY TICKET! My fee will become PART of their TRAVEL FUND, and P1,200 will be DEDUCTED from my payment because of my cancellation! As CONSOLATION, the BALANCE of my CASH-PAID now-Cebu Pac-dispensed "TRAVEL FUND" I can use to get any ticket of the same destination WITHIN 90 DAYS (albeit, I'm not yet sure whether I'll still be made to pay for the balance if the price of the future ticket s greater than the cancelled one). Thus, I CAN'T get a TOTAL CASH REFUND from Cebu Pac UNLIKE PAL. And according to the OIC (albeit she said it in a very respectful manner) of the travel agency where I purchased the ticket, PRESENTLY, that's the way things are with Cebu Pac, BECAUSE (deplorably, my view), OUR OWN GOVERNMENT, via the CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD (CAB) APPROVED SUCH SCHEME! May I please ask the following questions: 1. If PAL allows for my 100% refund, why doesn't Cebu Pac allow so?; 2. Why did the government (VIA CAB) allow such "TRAVEL FUND" scheme?; 3. Why am I NOT ENTITLED TO THE CASH REFUND OF MY MONEY FOR A SERVICE NOT RENDERED TO ME, ESPECIALLY WHEN I'M ALREADY METED OUT A P1200.00 PENALTY FOR CANCELLING MY FLIGHT?; 4. AS A CONSUMER, DOESN'T I HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHANGE MY MIND ABOUT A CERTAIN SERVICE, ESPECIALLY IF IN THE FIRST PLACE I STILL HAVEN'T USED THE SERVICE, and IN THE PROCESS I WAS EVEN ALREADY PENALIZED FOR IT?; 5. WHAT GIVES THE CEBU PACIFIC AIR THE RIGHT TO IMPOSE A WAIVER AND CONDITIONS AND LIMITATIONS ON FARES WHEN IN EFFECT GOES AGAINST THE BASIC CONSUMER'S RIGHTS, A) TO CHOOSE WHAT KIND OF SERVICE ONE WANTS TO USE; B) TO HAVE HIS/HER PAYMENT RETURNED FOR A SERVICE YET UNUSED, ESPECIALLY IF HE/SHE AS ALREADY BEEN CHARGED PENALTY BY DEFAULT? At present, I'd like to CONJECTURE that the CEBU PAC "TRAVEL FUND SCHEME" is NONE OTHER THAN A SKYHIGH ROBBERY! And! THANKS TO CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD, CEBU PAC is DOING IT WITH IMPUNITY!

CHRISTMAS. WARMTH. SHARING. COMPASSION. HOME.

 I remember way back 2006, I was in Leuven, Belgium for the 1st stop of my year-long Erasmus Mundus Master in Bioethics program. It was the first time in my whole life that I went abroad, at was also the first time I was also away from my family for a period longer than 2 weeks. And Christmas was approaching. And as the day of Christmas drew nearer, an unspeakable longing, or maybe even deep sadness was also growing in me. It was only then that I came to fully realize that,  I think I then have an idea of how OFWs felt too during such times. I was just blessed that out of nowhere, a very dear friend, Fr. K. Masong, invited myself and my 2 other Pinoy classmates to a blessing of a Pinay's house in Luxembourg on Christmas eve. Salva vida. Life saver. That indeed saved me from such deep sadness and longing. I've long forgotten her family name now, but the nickname of the owner of the house blest by Fr. K. was Ate Chari. Ate Chari and her family  shared with us their food, but most of all shared with us their warmth and treated us like family. It was just an overnight sojourn, but it provided me enough energy to eventually finish resolutely the remaining 7 more months of my program then. I'm home here now with my family in Davao. Very contented, feeling blest, on Christmas break from my Erasmus Mundus PhD program this time. And as such, it's my deepest and sincerest prayer that lost, longing, sad souls like I was before, will also find the warmth and welcome that people like Fr. K. and Ate Chari extended to me. Mga Kabayan, you may not realize it, but an overnight of kindness will tide our fellows towards an eternity of hopefulness and meaningfulness. I wish and pray everyone warmth, in the midst of possible coldness; sharing, in the midst of possible need; compassion, in the midst of possible sadness; a home, in the midst of strangers. Warmth. Sharing. Compassion. Home. Let us be, specially this Christmas. Merry Christmas everyone! God bless us all!