An argument for full transparency of the investigation into the illegal detention complaint against certain INC leaders
I am 100 percent sure that whatever decision the DOJ reaches on the illegal detention charges against INC leaders will become sala sa lamig, sala sa init.
(1) Because if the DOJ dismisses the case, then the complainant and his lawyers, and those who will ride on anything negative against the administration, will say that it was because the administration gave in to INC pressure.
(2) On the other hand, if the DOJ finds prima facie evidence to bring the case to court, then the INC and also the opposition will once again claim that the administration is targetting the INC or, as the INC spokesman said, “tinatrabaho kami”. In addition, they will raise the bogus question, why did you prioritize this case when there are other more important cases pending? And they will throw SAF 44, PDAF and DAP, MRT, and whatever else they can shake a stick at into the mix.
And so, what to do?
Maybe the DOJ should make the investigation fully transparent.
It can publish the complaint, the counter-affidavits, transcripts of the questioning of witnesses etc. so that the public will see how the DOJ arrived at a decision, whatever that decision may be.
Now lawyers will probably point out that there are legal obstacles to full transparency of investigations. Well maybe. But I don’t see an investigation being compromised if both parties to the case agree to have the investigation conducted in full view of the public.
As far as I’m concerned the one who insists on keeping the investigation away from the public eye has some explaining to do.
Why would any of the parties in the case – the complainant, the INC leaders, or the DOJ – want to keep the proceedings secret? Do any of them have anything to hide?
Bottomline is this: In the rule of law scheme of things, the credibility of the process is a necessary ingredient to public acceptance of the legitimacy of whatever decision is reached. Simply put, the public has to see due process at work.
That’s the problem with Supreme Court decisions – all we get to see are decisions, we are not allowed to see the deliberations, the debate among justices over points of law, so we have no idea how decisions were reached. And that’s why so many SC decisions become controversial, that’s why so many suspicions about ill motives and backroom deals are attributed to certain justices. Because those who prefer to work in the dark are always suspect.
Para hindi maging sala sa lamig, sala sa init ang anumang magiging desisyon ng DOJ, kailangan makita ng taumbayan ang proceso. Ganun ka-simple lang yun. Do it in the open, not behind closed doors.
Ngayon sino sa mga involved sa kaso – the complainant, the INC officials or the DOJ – ang mag-kukumplika ng usapan at tututol sa transparency? Sino sa kanila ang mas gustong mag trabaho sa dilim?
Some people have taken to calling the recent INC rally Edsa 4.
Excuse me poh pero ang laking insulto naman yun dun sa milyun-milyon na sumali Edsa 1, 2, and 3.
Siguro it would be better if we give the recent INC rally a name that distinguishes it from the three earlier truly massive protests….
let’s refer to it as the Edsa Underpass 1.
That will describe not only the location but also gives a clear indication of how many people attended…kung ilang tao ang kumasya dun sa Edsa-Shaw underpass.
Baka naman hostage na rin si Ka Eddie Manalo…
Off-target na naman itong si Walden Bello.
He implies that the government may have cut a deal with the INC and as a result sacrificed public interest.
Well maybe the government is just saving the INC from embarrasment by not revealing that INC leaders backed down when the government informed them that the rule of law will be upheld when the rally permit from Mandaluyong expires.
Or maybe the government thought it wiser to allow the INC leadership to save face…
Pero bakit pa ididiin ang unconditional surrender, which seems to be what Bello wants, e ang importante peace and order and the rule of law prevailed at the end.
But there’s another thing Bello missed, something na yun mga malilikot ang utak na tulad ko always notices.
Napansin ba ninyo that INC leader Manalo never sat down in those meetings with the President?
So napa-isip ako, bakit hindi siya ang humarap sa Presidente? Ayaw ba niya o hindi siya pinayagan ng Sanggunian nila?
If you remember, Angel Manalo hinted earlier that there was a cordon sanitaire around his brother and neither he nor his mother to speak to Ka Erdie directly….So were those INC reps speaking on behalf of Ka Erdie or were they really speaking for themselves in the guise of speaking for Ka Erdie? Dapat siguro itanong din yan ni Bello ‘yan….Hindi nagpapa-interview si Manalo…laging mga spokesman lang niya ang humaharap sa publiko…baka naman hostage na rin siya, diba?
Perennial has-been, Kit Tatad – a has-been even way back during the Marcos days when he still believed he could become something someday except fate decided that his life would go from “could become” to “has-been” without going through the “is” stage – cannot let go of the thought that continuing the INC rally could produce a chance for people like him to run the country without being elected.
“But all is not lost. While the fire still burns and the crowds are still out there, the INC could enlarge its vision and objective and with the help of all other groups and sectors, transform its march for justice for the Iglesia into a march for justice and dignity for all. Then we could begin to consider whether or not we should now set up a caretaker government before we start talking of another election.”
Syet…Maybe we ought to have a law making it illegal for has-beens to jerk off on their wet dreams in public.
Imagined “morning after the disastrous weekend adventure” conversation among INC leadership…
“What made us believe that stopping traffic in Edsa would be the way to stop our internal conflict?”
“It’s not over yet…let’s go nationwide that way we will know who among our brethren is with us or against us”
“Are you sure we want to know?”
Sa milyun-milyong myembro ng INC, kakarampot lang ang nag rally, less than ten thousand ang sumipot, ibig sabihin ba nun ay hindi sang-ayon ang karamihan sa panawagan ng Sanggunian nila? Guni-guni nalang ba ang sanggunian, hating guni ba sila ngayon?
From blogger stuart santiago comes an interesting angle on the shooting of anthony taberna’s cafe
“this morning the big news was the strafing of anthony taberna’s coffee shop in qc…. at first i didn’t connect it with the INC protest rally just because taberna had refused to comment on the issue from the start, which i took to mean that his sympathies lay with the INC leadership. and then i saw inday’s fb status:
“Attacks on Tunying’s cafe. He has been receiving many, many threats and very angry socmed messages from INC members loyal to leadership — because he kept quiet. I know some people have questions about Tunying… but it hasn’t been easy for him and Gerry this last month.”
“ah so. complicating it is the fact that taberna and samson are blood relations pala, so his loyalty is under question. “