There ought to be a way any disinterested mind can sift truth from an issue that has already been blurred by conflicting points of view – the matter being – whether or not the proceedings to hear the alleged C5 diversion case implicating a former Senate president should be allowed to begin.
Senate President Enrile has expressed the fact that he is willing to take on the responsibility while on the other hand, lady Miriam appears to throw the single stumbling block in its path. Hence, a couple of things are yet to be resolved – one, that the presidentiables inhibit themselves and two, that otherwise it should be brought to the proper court.
If no one inhibits himself or herself, former Senator Salonga calls this a case of conflict of interest. Certainly, Senator Villar himself does not want to go through the ritual which in the first place he considers a ‘kangaroo court’.
Roughly, Senator Santiago’s argument gravitates around the view that objectivity cannot be achieved since the members in this Ethics inquiry are politicians with presidential ambitions thus reducing the whole proceedings as presumably ‘politically-motivated’. Rightly so, lady Miriam thinks it is methodologically unfair to have the proceedings become simply aggravated by the ‘sheer number of the majority bloc’.
Beleaguered Villar knows beforehand that he will have the short end of the bargain to even dignify it with his presence. While at this, Enrile to just proceed with the case hearing provided there is a quorum, in which case, a quorum simply requires only two members in attendance even while Joker Arroyo did in fact bat for higher quorum requirement – but in vain.
Enrile did point out well that statements otherwise made outside of the Committee by Villar will not be given cognizance as these are being made not under oath unlike the complainant Senator Jamby Madrigal.
Thus while at this orgy, the ethical feud, call it that, seems to be fought in two fronts – at the Committee in a preliminary hearing, and in media or MSM in a press conference. So while in the former, evidence as well as documents will be presented in the halls of the Senate, another set of evidence or documents will be presented in mainstream media.
In the end, the whole ethical imbroglio will be judged in terms of perhaps – ‘x number of truths per square meter’ – figuratively speaking. This comeuppance affecting a senator is really rather untold in its long history of Senate investigations or inquiries. At no time is a senator himself the one being investigated on account of the complaint of a fellow senator, made more compelling with more senators sort of probably really ‘ganging up’ on him.
Signs would seem to indicate that the cognizant Senate committee is determined to take action on the matter and as soon as any decision is arrived at, barring no other stumbling blocks for it to proceed, then three things become a possibility – reprimand, suspension, or ouster.
Bottomline, people – as taxpayers – deserve to know if there is any clear case of public funds being diverted for anyone’s own selfish interest or why indeed the Senate inquiry has ignited a move? But then again, we are all aware that most investigations have proved to be just open-ended that we don’t remember anyone going to jail. It would have been a long list by now – involving officials and offices – in the entire bureaucracy.
Fact is, if you ordinarily scrape the surface of today’s newspapers alone, we see these crippling images – an alleged scam in the House for the procurement of fire extinguishers, an alleged scam in the DND/AFP re: RP-US Balikatan Exercises, an alleged scam in the procurement of noodles in DepEd’s feeding program, et cetera, et cetera. Where will all these lead us if not reduce taxpayers to a milking cow? No one takes heed, just no one.
Don’t we care to know if somebody might really be just washing his hands, pray not?
Popularity: 1% [?]
what makes you think manny villar is yours’ or anyone’s problem (except, of course, his opponents’)?
In fact not. But don’t you somehow want to see the good side in so-called ‘public trust’? At the very least, it will not hurt anyone if it takes its course. After all, that is the essence of a democracy.
Primer,
I’m with Atty. Ben on this point.
Actually Villar’s problem is his own making and it’s his to wiggle out of.
There are other worms which have lot come to light.
For those who consider him their problem there’s only one solution: not to vote for him.
Primer,
A few months ago, you were questioning Miriam’s inquiry on the Russian Mob I mean Euro generals,now you are agreeing with her.
That is quite a wake up call .A person should be judged(lack of a better term) on a case to case basis or rather better judge the idea not the person,like in the blogosphere.
Further…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6oewTeXnDW8
Karl,
Could it have been when I adopted the idea of – ‘methodologically unfair’?
If so, the pre-judgment needs to see that perspective, at least, just that.
Yes, ding, sure we all want to see how indeed he can wiggle out of the ‘mud’ but even spinmeisters may find difficulty in a final translation we normally call – playing the underdog. It bears watching nonetheless without having to trouble ourselves any bit.
Might as well ask “how do you solve a problem like corruption in the Philippines”?.
Other presidentiables such as Mar Roxas, Gordon, BF, Panlilio, Legarda seem not to saddled with the stain that seems to stick with Villar (whether sustained by his own actions or not). My question: since they do not have any corruption scandal up their sleeves, does this make them any better than Villar as a presidential candidate? Maybe we ought to do the math — in terms of competencies and track records from their accomplishments to their non-accomplishments.
Nuances of language really abound.
I clearly remember having started off, thus – “There ought to be a way any disinterested mind can …”.
In any case, the presidentiables (the more winnable even) are not from the territory and if it be correct to say that the next president should come from the Executive (however subjective this may sound).
Just to be shamelessly clear on those points.
Well then, madonna, if we speak of tangible accomplishments such as those that rose above the ground (literally, that is) then, we may start counting the U slots (favorably, that is), the foot bridges, the overpasses, the underpasses, the fly-overs, the replanted century old acacias, the flood control, the dredgings, the systems in place at the city government that became models for most cities throughout the country, the riverside alternate roads, the cycling lanes – and so on and so forth. In other words, let us count the scores for that Grand Pink Utopia.
I have became biased only because I want the next president to come from the Executive, one who has solid record of having built a city.
“Workplace economics” – which I haven’t even bothered to well browse on seems attractive in the entire proposal. Can we do the math now?
The way Bayani Fernando is accumulating pogi points, some are saying he’s surely is looking guwapo. What with the beautification and cleanliness program Metro Guwapo, the low-cost lodging for migrant city workers Guwapo Hotel, etc.
I think if Fernando wins, our FV regular here Nielsky will be Primer Guwapo.
Mr. Pagunuran, puwede bang mag-apply as a junior guwapo? :)
In comparison, some people have said Villar has his diversion/subdivision, while some people said BF has his fabrications/parts for footbridges/overpasses/underpasses, etc.
Both have their own accomplishments so it’s still a toss up between the winnables, heheh.
How do we solve a problem like Manny?
How do we solve problems like BF, or Lacson, or Chiz, or Mar, or Loren, or Among, or Noli, or Gordon, etc?
Difficult!
It’s their problem anyway, heheh.
Indite, if guilty, convict.
If convicted, send to jail.
Blagojevich
Spitzer
Gray Davis
The thing is not only Villar, but all of those found violating should be penalized instead of getting re-elected.
Once convicted, they should be stripped of their right to vote and run for public office.
The more rotten tomatoes we keep out of the electoral system, the better.
and if the charges are thrown out, elect him on his merits – not because he was indicted or “investigated”. in pinoy politics, there’s usually a lot of smoke but no fire – just a lot of bio gas from somebody’s shit.
and if the charges are thrown out, elect him on his merits – not because he was indicted or “investigated”. in pinoy politics, there’s usually alot of moke but no fire – just a lot of bio gas from somebody’s crap.
Phil M,
The lighter part of the man is a boy smiling. He he. You’re cool.
Bong,
Yes, my friend. Let us not re-elect them because that amounts to burning their security or immunity blanket. And then, let us jail them after conviction – the courts will please do their sacred tasks.
Madonna,
Since we are not judges nor justices, we can actually based our judgment on how well aware we are on their alleged corruption activities. We can approximate, we can actually calibrate whether this or that politician is into what is alleged of him.
For instance, common sense tells us we should not vote for a Garci, for a JocJoc, in fact even for an Iggy, if that be the norm. Problem is, not everyone equals our higher approximation.
At the proper time, I will attempt to say that Politician X is everybody’s problem than Politician Y, Z, etc.
Case of Villar is with glaring documents. Anybody can understand
that he prospered because of his position as a Senator…We are
not suckers.
Tasio,
You seem to have an even deeper understanding of that theory. Maybe you will oblige to explain further your point.
Maybe some laws should be revisited because presumably they can always enact laws that serve their best selfish interests. I think Joker Arroyo knows at least a thing but he does not press it hard enough.
ben,
You have long been the crap and your arguments do not gather heat.
Poor you, Mr. Lawyer who is supposed to exhibit interest in the finer niceties of the law but shrugs things off like a patronizing ‘bootlicker’. I don’t intend to offend you, but you are always out of order.
and what do you think of your harebrained articles – so much in quantity but zip in quality? i challenge you to admit or deny that you indeed are a “lawyer” as brianb thinks you are (or was he just being facetious?).
friends and foes,
It is not to my best advantage having to respond to unfounded comments, passing off as intelligent or educated, such as those that come from bencard, so perhaps I can beg off not to respond to any comment that crosses the intellectual highway since it obstructs the smooth flow of understanding.
I really don’t know who this man is, what he does but it seems that he is just out in here to present himself as a rabid defender of the faith. Enough – kaput.
Cheap tricks, stick to the knitting. We discuss issues here not careers. Test your views against the heat and don’t just patrol the lanes like some policeman.
Poor you. Have some ideas to discuss with the collective. Walk your talk.
DJB did leave a clear reminder to FV hobbyists or enthusiasts.
Let me just state it here. DJB was against character assassins (like you know who) who hide behind cloaks of anonymity (again, you know who – such as those whose first names we don’t know nor their last names). Further, he abhors aberrant behavior by those who do nothing good but bring out the worst in people by their chronic adhoms attacks.
Akala mo naman nag graduate ng Harvard Law or so-called Ivy League. Akala niya naman lahat ng comments niya ay pinaniniwalaan or pinakikinggan at may matutunan ba? Tsismoso pa, ano ba ito.
Primer:
Kunyari sinabi – “the mind of the pinoy is vacuous”
the sober response is – “it is not vacuous for the following reasons” and you state the reasons why not.
but when you reply with “how dare you accuse pinoys as having vacuous minds you racist skinhead” – in my POV, that takes the discussion notches below.
Respect begets respect.
Dapat kasi nyan, labanan ng idea… hindi labanan ng commentator.. kaya tayo nagkakagulo.
There are ambushes and there are counter-ambushes. When one party fights fire with, and the fire spreads, then complains about someone else using the fire without recognizing one’s contribution to the fire – is not consistent.
Rest assured I can take heed, bong.
At one point or other, one thing remains true – “what goes around, comes around”.
And that stupid guy keeps coming back – with or without ideas.