Well, folks, for our convenience (special mention for our commenter “danilo u. ignacio”), here’s an index of The Province of Cotabato Vs. The Gov’t of the Republic of the Philippines, et al., G.R. Nos. 183591, 183572, 183893 & 183591, promulgated October 14, 2008.
I strongly suggest that we read these brilliant pieces of legal writing.
The Decision
J. Carpio Morales, ponenteSeparate Concurring Opinions
C.J. Puno
J. Ynares-Santiago
J. CarpioSeparate Concurring and Dissenting Opinion
J. Leonardo-De Castro
J. BrionSeparate Opinions
J. Azcuna
J. Tinga
J. Chico-Nazario
J. ReyesDissenting Opinion
J. Velasco, Jr.
J. Nachura
(Oh, and, “danilo”? I especially want you to read them… you’ve been shooting your foot way too much. :D )
Will be back for this post, folks — we’ve much to mine from these readings. See y’all later.
Popularity: 1% [?]
Jester,
This is a great service to FV’s readers. You are spot on when yoy note that there are hip shooters roaming around FV. You might as well add elements who sit on high horses as they apologize of their idols without examining the core of the posts they comment on or are too lazy or intellectually-challenged to contribute full treatment essays or analysis with FV readers. They are content with just kibitzing.
Ding,
Net, they’re called “lazy dogs”
i’ll get back to you on that, fellas, i’m still rereading the opinions.
CJ puno’s and j carpio’s are particularly impressive.
CJ puno:
“it must be slain now.” panalo.
from j carpio:
“the MILF requested that they be considered a First Nation.” yet again, in the context of the lumads, MILF = Borg.
No, really. Justice Carpio makes mincemeat of the “First Nation” argument which is at the heart of the MOA-AD. He does the Law a real service by insisting that official Acts of the the Govt observe historicity, and thereby avoid absurdity. We have made the same arguments and observations here. Islam was a foreign religion which conquered a part of Mindanao, just as much as Christianity.
But I think there is a twisted way in which Justice Carpio will be deemed wrong by the the Architects of that ill fated MOA-AD. They believe Islam was the first CONQUERING nation, at least ahead of the Spaniards by 70 or so years, not some aboriginal lumad settlement of Stone Age Philippines.
by j reyes:
FTW!
good point, dean. of course, islam and christianity are the only major surviving conquering “nations”, to indulge in that line of thinking.
Jester,
Reading CJ Pune, aren’t you almost tempted tp say Puno in 2010? But equally, his tome as I earlier observed @ At Midfield is a gem of a lesson in civics and a warning to all officials who would dare think that executive power is a blank check to hoodwink the people on the presumption of constitutionality.
Again, Mr. Gagelonia, let me correct what you read, and I believe you read the decision wrong.
The SC decided on the constitutionality of this agreement because one government official questioned it. The main onus is the argument on the concept of first conquering nation, which Jester wrongly interpreted as the argument that figuratively tore the entire argument down.
It is NOT this concept that the SC considered substantial. For if that is the case, the SC now rewrote history. What went wrong is the frail and weak argument presented by the Solicitor General who gave a very weak basis on this concept. It seems to me that the SolGen did that on the orders of Malacanang since at that time, the nation was under an agitated state.
What the SC found rather amusing is the fact that the nego panel readily gave in purposely on the “request” of the MILF to have their lands declared “BJE”. That is unconstitutional and destroys the main pillars of Philippine state-hood. That is why this agreement became suspect. Noteworthy also is the argument that the State did’nt sign it anyway; so no act committed against the Charter.
Having said that, it’s time for the likes of Ding and Jester to read their histories and their books on the Constitution. I agree, the exercise of executive power is not a blank check to “hoodwick” the people on the presumption of constitutionality. Yet, there are certain decisions which, people like Ding would refuse to understand but must be done to promote a higher, more lofty state interests. Those risks which Malacanang took would probably be hard to understand now; but in the future, people would appreciate the risks that they took just to resolve this pesky centuries-old issue that is Mindanao.
High Priest,
You clearly have not read the decision and opinions about this MOA-AD, otherwise you would not be saying such silly things!
i have read my friend djb. in fact, i saw the decision even before you saw and read it.
you’ll not understand the risks and the politics behind every executive decision precisely because you have’nt experienced being in government. government is for the risk-takers; not idealists.
Aha,we have another lawyer in our midst belittling rather that debating or reasoning a point. That’s fine really. Each to his own devices. Careful those on high horses. The higher you think you are, the harder you fall.And spare us the condescending tone unless you are good at only that.
ding,
debate me if what I told djb wrong? i mean, isn’t correct to say that only those who have the “balls” so to speak, to decide matters involving security and other state matters be left to those who are risk-takers?
you may find arroyo liable for this agreement but the fact that the SC established is, she is NOT liable. and in the event that, indeed, cases be filed against Madame Arroyo in the future, it will not prosper.
so much for high horses.
Here we have a point of agreement: “… isn’t correct to say that only those who have the “balls” so to speak, to decide matters involving security and other state matters be left to those who are risk-takers?”
But are citizens not entitled to voice out their perspectives? You perhaps breath rarefied air in the corridors of power but does this mean if have a monopoly of the same. It’s our individual and collective futures we are talking about, right?
Will us lesser mortals take your appropriation of rick-taking prerogative as your preserve without consulting us? BTW Did you know that even Celso Lobregat is on record as having complained that even their own clan’s house plot in Zamboanga City had erroneously been included in the proposed BJE.
Ding,
Yes.. You and Djb are entitled. Nobody’s saying that you are’nt. I’m just answering you and djb’s assertions here.
You voted for us. You must trust your elected officials of the task that you reposed on us.
Rejoinder to Ding and Djb,
Thinking about it, why would the President of the Republic of the Philippines consult the people on this? Are you saying that the Intelligence of the Mob is greater than those of the palace? Will it matter if the people love this agreement? No.
Consulting the people before deciding on matters of national importance is not how government works, Ding and DJB. Certain decisions need quick resolutions. The Mindanao problem has been languishing in the Office of the Executive Secretary for so long. They need to act.
You guys always want to trap PGMA. If PGMA did’nt act on the clamour to resolve the Mindanao issue, you’ll fault her for it. When she acted to the best interest of all parties involved, you lambasted her for it. Quo vadis?
High Priest (whoever you really are),
Am intrigued by “You voted for us. You must trust your elected officials of the task that you reposed on us.”
You are saying you yourself are an “elected official.” As you are using a pseudonym, would you do us the honor of know WHO YOU ARE? This way I’d know if I did vote for you. That’s just fair right? Granting your assertion of being among the elect, that raises the point of your having a legitimate mandate from the sovereign.
So pray tell me are you indeed, yourself, among the elected? Re GMA i am actually among those who respect what the SC did when it installed her, all misgivings and questions aside. Erap dropped the ball and he deserves what happened to him.
It may please you to know that every time I take a snapshot of the current political opposition I see more rogues than genuine patriots. I actually have only one beef with the President, I’d wish for her to run a more transparent Palace with manifest readiness to account for its actions.
I am most opposed to the use of any extra-constitutional means to oust her. I actually feel she will complete her term and allow clean and honest elections in 2010. That’s one legacy she can leave Filipinos. Doing that, history will be kinder, pimples and all, in a manner of speaking.
ding,
well, surely, you never voted for me because you’re not a registered voter in my province, hahaha!
about transparency, why are you so concerned about this? government has the right not to reveal sensitive state matters on you people. Why would we do it? Me and my staff are tired of answering these stupid questions from the media, asking for transparency.
i gathered that you once served government. good for you. and you understand where i’m coming from. i’ll not sugar-coat my words here since you people should be instructed plainly on how we want this government to act. I’ll not mince words. Understand why your government acts that way. Then, you’ll have a better perspective of things.
“Me and my staff are tired of answering these stupid questions from the media, asking for transparency.
i gathered that you once served government. good for you. and you understand where i’m coming from. i’ll not sugar-coat my words here since you people should be instructed plainly on how we want this government to act. I’ll not mince words. Understand why your government acts that way. Then, you’ll have a better perspective of things.”
Yes, I fully understand where you are coming from.
I also understand, as a Filipino, when my government is most distrusted when the normal course of things should be for the citizenry to trust and fully respect the government.
Your tone of self-assuredness is breathtaking I could almost mistake it for hubris stemming from holding high office. I will grant you your stature. I just wish you keep your Filipino feet on the ground.Good day to you.
shades of “l’etat c’est moi”?
and i was under the misimpression, perhaps, that we are governed by Article III, Sections 4 and 7, as well as Article IX, Section 1.
re your “The main onus is the argument on the concept of first conquering nation, which Jester wrongly interpreted as the argument that figuratively tore the entire argument down.” — oh, no. i was merely quoting the persuasive arguments. i don’t think that there was any single cannon shot that sank the MOA-AD.
as i understand, the highpiss’ point of view is rooted much more on earlier days…like the ratification cases of ‘javellana, et. al…where we found the SC bent over and gave its ass to FM..
of course, he did not read the case decided recently, it was an admonition to agents of gov’t. to act within the confines of the basic law…’delegare non delegata’…
but don’t make a mistake…i’m for the MOA-AD, and for solving the century old problem for peace in mindanao…
rebels and rebellion cannot be necessarily contained within a constitution…