It is more fun criticizing
Rizal Philippines
September 27, 2018
We all grieve that so many lives were lost at the recent landslides in Naga Cebu, and in Itogon Benguet as
aftermath of two much rains: with recent count of 69 at Itogon and 40+ at Naga Cebu. The loss of lives and staggering.
Of course a lot of finger pointing and blaming goes on. A whipping dog and sacrificial lamb must be had. Somebody must bear the sins. But who is to be blamed.?
1. In Mt Province and elsewhere in the Philippines it is predicted that landslides will continue: all the time. It is the law of nature and nothing can prevent this. According to the late geophysicist Reynaldo Punongbayan, as for Mt. Province, since it is tall, it will fall the principle that what is high must come down. So in Mt Province, the high mountains will erode and slide until the whole region flattens out.
So it is really dangerous to live near the mountains where there a peaks; it is unsafe. As in the Alps, there will be always avalanche.
So when DENR geophysicists declare a place unsafe, the LGU must obey and enforce the no residents
warning
2. However due to politics, no LGU heads (mayors etc) have the guts nor the political will to enforce such
orders for fear of losing votes. In other areas, residents continue to live near flood prone areas, at river banks
because the mayors cant enforce risk reduction measures. In Itogon, the Mayor said that many residents
were requesting that they return to their homes right next to the collapsed area. It is understandable: they have to get their belongings, they love their homes
So what is next? What is new?
Thursday, September 27, 2018
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
Makati RTC Branch 150 issues arrest warrant and HDO vs Sen Trillanes - is democracy dead?
It is more fun criticizing
Rizal Philippines
September 24, 2018
Makati RTC Branch 150 under Judge Alameda issued arrest warrant and HDO vs. Sen Sonny Trillanes mere 24 hours after presentation of evidences. The warrant was promptly served the sheriff and PNP accompanied by no less than NCRPO head Superintedent Eleazar. Sen Trillanes promptly posted a bail a of P200,000 and the arrest warrant earlier issued was cancelled, giving temporary liberty to the good senator. Sen Trillanes said democracy dead and the person behind this move a demon
Rebellion is now non bailable offense but since the original case is alive, Judge Alameda who earlier handled the rebellion and sedition case set the bail at P200,000 which is followed now.
Recitation of facts:
1. Pres Duterte under the Proclamation 572 cancelled the amnesty granted to Trillanes by then Pres. Benigno Aquino (Proclamation 75 series of 2010) on the grounds that the good senator: 1. Did not comply with the documentary requirements of the amnesty (no application form was filed 2. That Trillanes did not admit the crime of rebellion (contained in the application)
2 Sen Trillanes fearing arrest by PNP and /or military holed up in the Senate
3. Sen Trillanes camp asked TRO from Supreme Court against issuance of arrest warrant and HDO
4. The Supreme Court denied the petition of Trillanes and the case was brought back to RTC Branch 150
which the former claimed to have been jurisdiction over the case and the facts of the case.
Arguments of DU30 govt: (Pro)
1. Trillanes did not file, and/or DND could not find the application of Trillanes; (contained in the 7th
or 8th Whereas of proclamation 572) Ang mabigat, and even mentioned in a recent speech, the good
senator said hindi sila dapat nacharge ng rebellion kasi hindi naman talaga ganuon. (Mabigat ito and his
attacks on the Pres, can be construed as continuing rebellion since he never admitted his guilt, and thus
the case should really be alive)
2. That Gen Volt Gazmin usurped the authority of the President when he signed the Certificate of Amnesty
It is not clear under the Proclamation 75 that Gen Gazmin indeed was delegated to grant the amnesty;
processing was delegated to the DND. If we are fundamentalist constitutionalist, indeed only Pres
should sign the final certificate of amnesty.
3. That Trillanes did not admit the crime he committed (a separate affidavit or as contained in the application
On various occasions and lately the good senator stated that his group did not commit rebellion?
Argumentss by Trillanes and supporters (Con)
1. There were affidavits made by various persons to whom Trillanes submitted the application. But the court wants the primary evidence ie the application made by Trillanes; Trillanes said there are videos
As per former Sen. Santiago, only desarollo (documents) evidence count.
2. There were videos shown that showed he filed the applications
3. There were several hundreds and even thousands (followers of Magdalo) who were given amnesty. Is their amnesty defective and can be recalled?
4. That there no usurpation of authority since Pres. Aquinos proclamation clearly gave authority to Gen Gasmin and members of the Amnesty Commission to process the amnesty.
4. That this is unconstitutional. An amnesty granted by the President and approved by the Congress cant be nullified.
5. That he complied with the requirements of Proclamation 75 (but the procedures there are not that clear)
Discussions
1. Sec. Guevarra maintains that the amnesty proclamation granted by then Pres Aquino is not being questioned. in general. What is being questioned in particular is the grant of amnesty (selective) to Sen Trillanes who was reported not to have submitted the necessary application and admission of guilt
2. That this is unconstitutional. That is going to take a lot debate and speculation
1. The Constitution merely states that the President has the authority with the concurrence of Congress
to grant amnesty. That the President has or no power to revoke it is not stated. That means he
can also revoke it Sec 19 Article VII (one liner)
2. The concurrence here is a difficulty. Du30 claims that the constitution grants exclusive right to the President to grant amnesty and there fore the concurrence is a sort of confirmation only (not an approval)
It is not clear under the Proclamation 75 that Gen Gazmin indeed was delegated to grant the amnesty;
processing was delegated to the DND. as is being mouthed by the good senator. Strictly speaking Pres Aquinos name should appear on the grant of amnesty Does it? (Am I talking out of the hat)
Does this exclusive right also mean that the President can also delegate this authority
A lot of generalization, smart aleck remarks, fallacious arguments even from top guys are going around and this makes it more confusing. Tama yong sabi ng iba let the best minds like the courts decide and respect that
Questions begging for answer:
1. Are there factual basis that Trillanes submitted the requirements for the amnesty. Why can he
not produce the primary evidence? Why would you lose the documents which are the basis of his
freedom/amnesty for the rebellion that he actually committed
2. Is the proclamation 572 really unconstitutional? Let us not be quick to judge on that?
3. Is it true that democratic practices are dead? Do we have puppet judges and DOJ staff?
Are they not thinking?
Let us be impartial and stop being swayed by demagogues who may also be servants of the devil. Cant do nothing except to confuse and show hatred amongst us. I have seen this type of people in my own organization: intelligent, but who have crooked understanding of reality. Small minds
Tama sabi ng mga Pastor. God nor the country never create problems. So the good senator can not point to Duterte as the windmill. As Don Quixote, he created the windmill - he is responsible for his fate ever since he staged the Oakwood and Manila Pen attack. Mag isip din tayong mga sympathizers ng senador...Baka kasama tayo duon sa sabi na every minute, a sucker is born
Rizal Philippines
September 24, 2018
Makati RTC Branch 150 under Judge Alameda issued arrest warrant and HDO vs. Sen Sonny Trillanes mere 24 hours after presentation of evidences. The warrant was promptly served the sheriff and PNP accompanied by no less than NCRPO head Superintedent Eleazar. Sen Trillanes promptly posted a bail a of P200,000 and the arrest warrant earlier issued was cancelled, giving temporary liberty to the good senator. Sen Trillanes said democracy dead and the person behind this move a demon
Rebellion is now non bailable offense but since the original case is alive, Judge Alameda who earlier handled the rebellion and sedition case set the bail at P200,000 which is followed now.
Recitation of facts:
1. Pres Duterte under the Proclamation 572 cancelled the amnesty granted to Trillanes by then Pres. Benigno Aquino (Proclamation 75 series of 2010) on the grounds that the good senator: 1. Did not comply with the documentary requirements of the amnesty (no application form was filed 2. That Trillanes did not admit the crime of rebellion (contained in the application)
2 Sen Trillanes fearing arrest by PNP and /or military holed up in the Senate
3. Sen Trillanes camp asked TRO from Supreme Court against issuance of arrest warrant and HDO
4. The Supreme Court denied the petition of Trillanes and the case was brought back to RTC Branch 150
which the former claimed to have been jurisdiction over the case and the facts of the case.
Arguments of DU30 govt: (Pro)
1. Trillanes did not file, and/or DND could not find the application of Trillanes; (contained in the 7th
or 8th Whereas of proclamation 572) Ang mabigat, and even mentioned in a recent speech, the good
senator said hindi sila dapat nacharge ng rebellion kasi hindi naman talaga ganuon. (Mabigat ito and his
attacks on the Pres, can be construed as continuing rebellion since he never admitted his guilt, and thus
the case should really be alive)
2. That Gen Volt Gazmin usurped the authority of the President when he signed the Certificate of Amnesty
It is not clear under the Proclamation 75 that Gen Gazmin indeed was delegated to grant the amnesty;
processing was delegated to the DND. If we are fundamentalist constitutionalist, indeed only Pres
should sign the final certificate of amnesty.
On various occasions and lately the good senator stated that his group did not commit rebellion?
Argumentss by Trillanes and supporters (Con)
1. There were affidavits made by various persons to whom Trillanes submitted the application. But the court wants the primary evidence ie the application made by Trillanes; Trillanes said there are videos
As per former Sen. Santiago, only desarollo (documents) evidence count.
2. There were videos shown that showed he filed the applications
3. There were several hundreds and even thousands (followers of Magdalo) who were given amnesty. Is their amnesty defective and can be recalled?
4. That there no usurpation of authority since Pres. Aquinos proclamation clearly gave authority to Gen Gasmin and members of the Amnesty Commission to process the amnesty.
4. That this is unconstitutional. An amnesty granted by the President and approved by the Congress cant be nullified.
5. That he complied with the requirements of Proclamation 75 (but the procedures there are not that clear)
Discussions
1. Sec. Guevarra maintains that the amnesty proclamation granted by then Pres Aquino is not being questioned. in general. What is being questioned in particular is the grant of amnesty (selective) to Sen Trillanes who was reported not to have submitted the necessary application and admission of guilt
2. That this is unconstitutional. That is going to take a lot debate and speculation
1. The Constitution merely states that the President has the authority with the concurrence of Congress
to grant amnesty. That the President has or no power to revoke it is not stated. That means he
can also revoke it Sec 19 Article VII (one liner)
2. The concurrence here is a difficulty. Du30 claims that the constitution grants exclusive right to the President to grant amnesty and there fore the concurrence is a sort of confirmation only (not an approval)
It is not clear under the Proclamation 75 that Gen Gazmin indeed was delegated to grant the amnesty;
processing was delegated to the DND. as is being mouthed by the good senator. Strictly speaking Pres Aquinos name should appear on the grant of amnesty Does it? (Am I talking out of the hat)
Does this exclusive right also mean that the President can also delegate this authority
A lot of generalization, smart aleck remarks, fallacious arguments even from top guys are going around and this makes it more confusing. Tama yong sabi ng iba let the best minds like the courts decide and respect that
Questions begging for answer:
1. Are there factual basis that Trillanes submitted the requirements for the amnesty. Why can he
not produce the primary evidence? Why would you lose the documents which are the basis of his
freedom/amnesty for the rebellion that he actually committed
2. Is the proclamation 572 really unconstitutional? Let us not be quick to judge on that?
3. Is it true that democratic practices are dead? Do we have puppet judges and DOJ staff?
Are they not thinking?
Let us be impartial and stop being swayed by demagogues who may also be servants of the devil. Cant do nothing except to confuse and show hatred amongst us. I have seen this type of people in my own organization: intelligent, but who have crooked understanding of reality. Small minds
Tama sabi ng mga Pastor. God nor the country never create problems. So the good senator can not point to Duterte as the windmill. As Don Quixote, he created the windmill - he is responsible for his fate ever since he staged the Oakwood and Manila Pen attack. Mag isip din tayong mga sympathizers ng senador...Baka kasama tayo duon sa sabi na every minute, a sucker is born
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)