Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Fw: Lies v Truths

Expand Messages
  • Joseph Banguis
    Please read on and educate yourselves. Please pass on to your friends if you believe... DRILON s Lies VS The Truth LIE: The Truth Commission was arbitrarily
    Message 1 of 1 , Dec 28, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Please read on and educate yourselves. Please pass on to your friends if you believe...
      DRILON's Lies VS The Truth

      LIE: The Truth Commission was arbitrarily struck down because of partisan reasons and because the Supreme Court does not want to find out the truth

      TRUTH: Unrevised, the creation of the Truth Commission goes against the Equal Protection Clause. The SC decision's last words are as follows:

      "Lest it be misunderstood, this is not the death knell for a truth commission as nobly envisioned by the present administration. Perhaps a revision of the executive issuance so as to include the earlier past administrations would allow it to pass the test of reasonableness and not be an affront to the Constitution. Of all the branches of the government, it is the judiciary which is the most interested in knowing the truth and so it will not allow itself to be a hindrance or obstacle to its attainment. It must, however, be emphasized that the search for the truth must be within constitutional bounds for “ours is still a government of laws and not of men."

      The problem was minor and could have been remedied by a simple amendment to include all other past administrations. But the fact is there has been no effort to rectify that particular defect, yet the President is blaming the Supreme Court for its demise.

      LIE: Drilon claims that Corona has had a “consistent voting pattern favoring the Arroyo government’s controversial policies.” 

      TRUTH: These Supreme Court decisions were either unanimous decisions, or those in which only one to five justices dissented. 

      LIE: Drilon alleges that in 2004 Corona favored Arroyo by voting as constitutional her Proclamation No. 427 which declared a state of rebellion in the wake of the 2003 Oakwood mutiny. 

      TRUTH: What he doesn’t mention: only one out of the 15 justices dissented. Hilario Davide, then the chief justice, and his successor Artemio Panganiban voted for the proclamation. Is Drilon saying that these two chief justices were Arroyo’s stooges as well? Drilon even forgets that Arroyo consulted him on that proclamation, when he was a supportive Senate president then.

      LIE: Drilon complains that in 2005, Corona voted to dismiss a petition by communist-affiliated groups to declare unconstitutional “Arroyo’s VAT reform act.” 

      TRUTH: It was also a unanimous Court decision. Drilon is saying that Corona is pro-Arroyo for voting for a law which he forgets he pushed for when he was Senate president.

      LIE: Drilon whines that in 2006, Corona voted to uphold Arroyo’s executive order that invoked executive privilege in congressional investigations.
      TRUTH: The Court’s decision was unanimous, and was even penned by Carpio-Morales. 

      LIE: Drilon claims that “Corona concurred in the Court decision stopping Aquino from revoking the appointment of alleged midnight appointees made by Arroyo.” 

      TRUTH: There is no such decision. There is only a status quo ante order, and only for one official. And even that order was agreed to by 12 justices, while three were on official leave.

      LIE: The Chief Justice allegedly favored the former president in Gudani

      TRUTH: The records of Court show that the Chief Justice was on leave at that time. 

      LIE: Coming from a trip from the US, Corona cut his trip short to make sure the TRO for the DOJ circular would be given.

      TRUTH: Corona's itinerary was never changed. He was scheduled to receive the main award of the Seagull Philippines' First Asian Leaders Awards for Excellence, Best Values and Social Responsibility in Makati City, November 11 which was a Friday. The SC met en banc on Nov 14 which was a Monday. The event was even covered by ABS-CBN's Ina Reformina here

      LIE: Chief Justice Corona has a consistent voting pattern ALWAYS favoring of the former administration's policies

      TRUTH: CJ Corona voted against the former administration in the following:

      In Islamic Da’wah Council of the Philippines v. Office of the Executive Secretary, the Chief Justice nullified EO 46 which was issued on 26 October 2001 by the former administration. 

      The Chief Justice also joined the majority in The Secretary of National Defense v. Manalo in ruling that “[t]he ineffective investigation and protection by government agents under the secretary of defense and the AFP failed to guarantee the right of security of respondents as required by the Constitution

      Corona voted with the majority in Central Mindanao University v. The Honorable Executive Secretary, concerning the annulment of Presidential Proclamation 310 that took property from a state university for distribution to indigenous peoples and cultural communities

      In David v. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the Chief Justice, as a member of a unanimous Court, voted to nullify the warrantless arrests against petitioners David, Llamas and others, and the searches and seizures against the Tribune, under authority of Presidential Proclamation No. 1017 and General Order No. 5 of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for being unconstitutional.

      THE TRUTH: As a separate branch of government the Court and the Judiciary must resist all attempts and efforts to turn it into a compliant tool for any of the other branches. It is precisely in keeping with the republican system that the Court must never be seen as a mere lackey or yes man of the executive or the legislative departments. What others want is to have enough influence to dictate how justice should be dispensed and what the outcome of cases should be.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.