New and Used Car Talk Reviews Hot Cars Comparison Automotive Community

The Largest Car Forum in the Philippines



View Poll Results: Senate's verdict on CJ

Voters
69. You may not vote on this poll
  • Guilty!

    58 84.06%
  • Not Guilty

    9 13.04%
  • i couldn't care less

    2 2.90%
Page 231 of 421 FirstFirst ... 131181221227228229230231232233234235241281331 ... LastLast
Results 2,301 to 2,310 of 4205
  1. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2301
    Quote Originally Posted by chua_riwap View Post
    nagkakalat na ba?
    sasama loob ni tomboy nyan........

    mukhang walang depensang maiharap. kaya ang depensa nila ay technicalities.

  2. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2302
    nagkainitan na sila prosecutor judge drilon and cuevas.

  3. Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    619
    #2303
    Importante ang technicalities. Yan ang binabayaran sa kanya jan kahit pro-bono.

    Magaling talaga si teacher cuevas. Narinig nyo inasar nya si prosecution team drilon. Nainis si frank biglang naging juana change.

  4. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2304
    prosecutor(?) judge arroyo now questioning cuevas....

  5. Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    3,872
    #2305
    Here's a pretty good discussion on whether or not to convict:


    From: InterAksyon.Com March 12, 2012
    OPINION: Pursuing the Highest Standard of Public Accountability
    By: Atty. Mel Sta. Maria

    The Supreme Court does not hesitate to mete out the severest penalty on an erring court personnel for violation of the Philippine Constitution on public accountability.

    In Faelnar vs. Palabrica, the Supreme Court would have dismissed an erring court stenographer for making inaccurate entries in his statement of assets and liabilities had he not resigned. Citing a host of previous Supreme Court decisions, then Chief Justice Reynato Puno stated "that every person involved in the dispensation of justice, from the highest official to the lowest clerk, must live up to the strictest standards of integrity, probity, uprightness, honesty and diligence in the public service. We say it again: dishonesty is a malevolent act that has no place in the judiciary. All told, we remain dauntless in our resolve in chastising any conduct, act or omission on the part of those involved in the administration of justice which would violate the highest standards of public accountability." (Faelnar vs. Palabrica A.M. No. P-06-2251 January 20, 2009)

    Again citing a number of the Courtís decision, then Chief Justice Puno also emphasized that the breach need not even be connected with the official duties of the public officer by citing a 1960 case penned by Justice Montemayor:

    The Government cannot tolerate in its service a dishonest official, even if he performs his duties correctly and well, because by reason of his government position, he is given more and ample opportunity to commit acts of dishonesty against his fellow men, even against offices and entities of the government other than the office where he is employed; and by reason of his office, he enjoys and possesses a certain influence and power which renders the victims of his grave misconduct, oppression and dishonesty less disposed and prepared to resist and to counteract his evil acts and actuations. The private life of an employee cannot be segregated from his public life. Dishonesty inevitably reflects on the fitness of the officer or employee to continue in office and the discipline and morale of the service. (Nera vs. Garcia G.R. No. L-13160 106 Phil 1031)

    The aforementioned jurisprudence offers substantive guidance to the Impeachment Court now trying Chief Justice Renato Corona.

    If the Senator-judges acquit, how could they explain the difference, as public servants, between a "lowly" court stenographer and the highest magistrate, the Chief Justice? Is there a double standard in law where those in high position are privileged in the application of the prohibition in the Constitution? Will there be hair-splitting distinctions that shadow the wisdom and consistency of public accountability?

    If the Senator-judges convict, how then could they make a pronouncement without dampening the morale of the service, particularly the members and personnel of the judiciary actively supporting the Chief Justice? How will conviction change the course of judicial history, especially amid the perception that a conviction will weaken the independence of the judiciary? Or will it just be "business as usual"?

    These questions highlight that, more than a mere finding of "guilty" or "not guilty", the Impeachment Court carries a much more fundamental burden. Each Senator-judge must decide in a way that the ordinary Filipino citizen will genuinely believe that the highest standard of public accountability has been applied without distinction and regardless of rank in public office.

    In the end, the impeachment process is not only a judgment of the accountability of the Chief Justice. It is equally about the highest standard of public accountability of the Senate as an Impeachment Court.
    I hope this piece sums it up for all of us who will await the Senate's verdict vis-a-vis CJ Corona.

  6. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2306
    Presiding officer Enrile now making a ruling....

  7. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2307
    Denied ang desire ng defense. Cong. Tobias now being presented as witness by the defense.

  8. Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    619
    #2308
    Kapampangan pala ito si mr sharon cuneta, ang author ng Juvenile Justice Welfare Act of 2006(That stupid pangilinan law)

    Dalawa pala taga pampanga sa senado......Senador lito lapid.

  9. Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    26,770
    #2309
    para saan ang testimonial evidence ni Toby?

  10. Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    619
    #2310
    Nag-set lang pala ng tone si teacher cuevas. Interesting mga sinasabi ni congressman toby tiangco.

Impeachment against CJ Corona..