April 20, 2006 · Posted in: Gloriagate, Governance, In the News

Supreme Court partially voids EO 464

IN a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court today declared Executive Order 464 as constitutional insofar as it bans Cabinet officials from appearing before congressional inquiries without the consent of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

The court however said that Congress can compel the appearance of these officials, so long as investigations are done in aid of legislation.

EO 464, which prohibits senior executive and military officials from appearing in Congress without the president’s permission, was issued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo on September 28, 2005. The order was issued as two military officers appeared before the Senate Committee on National Defense which began an investigation on the “Hello, Garci” controversy. It also came a week after National Security Norberto Gonzales testified before the Senate on the equally controversial Venable LLP contract.

In a 52-page resolution, the court declared Sections 1 and 2(a) of EO 464 as valid while two other provisions, Sections 2(b) and 3 as invalid.

Under Section 1 of EO 464, Cabinet officials must seek the permission of the president before appearing in any congressional inquiry.

“Congress undoubtedly has a right to information from the executive branch whenever it is sought in aid of legislation, ” the court said, “If the executive branch withholds such information on the ground that it is privileged, it must so assert it and state the reason therefor and why it must be respected.”

Section 2(a) of the order invokes the “executive privilege” to disallow the disclosure of classified and confidential information between the President and certain public officials. These include:

Conversations and correspondence between the President and public officials covered by EO 464
Information between inter-government agencies prior to the conclusion of treaties of executive agreements
Discussions in closed-door Cabinet meetings
Matters affecting national security and public order

“The doctrine of executive privilege is thus premised on the fact that certain information must, as a matter of necessity, be kept confidential in pursuit of the public interest,” the court said.

“The privilege being, by definition, an exemption from the obligation to disclose information, in this case to Congress, the necessity must be of such high degree as to outweigh the public interest in enforcing that obligation in a particular case,” it added.

The court also rendered Section 2(b) to be void, as executive privilege is only “invoked in relation to specific categories of information and not to categories of persons.” Under Section 2(b) of EO 464, the following officials are covered by the executive privilege:

Senior officials of executive departments (e.g. undersecretaries)
Generals and flag officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
Philippine National Police officers with the rank of chief superintendent or higher
Senior national security officials
Other officers as may be determined by the President

With the court rendering this provision as invalid, this could mean that the above-stated officials may no longer be covered under the executive privilege doctrine. But the court said: “the reference to persons being ‘covered by the executive privilege’ may be read as an abbreviated way of saying that the person is in possession of information which is, in the judgment of the head of office concerned, privileged. The Court shall thus proceed on the assumption that this is the intention of the challenged order.”

This means that upon the determination of the President that an official is “covered by the executive privilege,” he or she must secure the President’s consent before appearing in Congress.

“It follows, therefore, that when an official is being summoned by Congress on a matter which, in his own judgment, might be covered by executive privilege, he must be afforded reasonable time to inform the President or the Executive Secretary of the possible need for invoking the privilege. This is necessary in order to provide the President or the Executive Secretary with fair opportunity to consider whether the matter indeed calls for a claim of executive privilege,” the decision stated.

The court however said that the “claim of exemption from an obligation to disclose information must be clearly asserted,” adding that Congress has the right to know why the executive considers the requested information privileged.

“It does not suffice to merely declare that the President, or an authorized head of office, has determined that it is so,” it said.

The court also ruled that in order to avoid conflicts, Congress should indicate in its invitation the statute which prompted the need for the inquiry and the subject of the inquiry.

Concurring in the decision were Chief Justice Artemio V. Panganiban, Justices Leonardo A. Quisumbing, Consuelo Ynares-Santiago, Angelina Sandoval-Gutierrez, Antonio T. Carpio, Ma. Alicia Austria-Martinez, Renato C. Corona, Conchita Carpio Morales, Romeo J. Callejo, Sr., Adolfo S. Azcuna, Dante O. Tinga, Minita V. Chico-Nazario, Cancio C. Garcia, and Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr. Senior Associate Justice Reynato S. Puno is on leave.

See the full text of EO 464 here and the Supreme Court decision here.

60 Responses to Supreme Court partially voids EO 464

Chabeli

April 20th, 2006 at 11:31 pm

Parang tagilid ang decision no?

It took the SC too long to rule on EO464! GMA knew that it would take the SC awhile to come up with a ruling, and so she took advantage of this, which bought her time to carry out what she wanted to do. This does not redeem the SC.

The SC is just another damaged institution–one of the many GMA has destroyed–all for her personal gain. So for now, who do we really have left? The Senate?

Cecile Impens

April 21st, 2006 at 1:56 am

Arroyo Executive Order 464 tries to kill all inquiries that involve government executives and high-ranking military officials. Plain and simple. So to make the story short, Alibaba and the “forth thee” thieves could continue their plunders and there would be no more problems nor inquiries anymore as they are all IMMUNIZED!

Juan Makabayan

April 21st, 2006 at 3:09 am

So is it a unanimous ’split’ decision? should be simply ‘unconstitutional’. an apple is either rotten or not rotten, why slice it and say which is good and which portion is rotten. That is a rotten decision.

schumey

April 21st, 2006 at 3:41 am

At least now its all clear. The SC has pointed out the guidelines on what and how GMA may claim executive privilege. Unfortunately, the senate has finished its report and recommendations on the “Fertilizer Scam”. To me this far outweighs all the investigations of the senate at this is outright plunder and bribery. Many of GMA’s cohorts will be exposed and hardest hit by this scam. I hope the senate can open its investigation on this matter again.

Next in line is the overpriced Northrail. I just wonder why the Northrail costs more than $500 mil. while the longer Southrail is less than a $60 mil.

Toro

April 21st, 2006 at 6:56 am

I don’t believe the SC deserves to be called rotten or damaged institution just because it did not rule entirely to what we wanted it to do. They made a decision based on facts and the rule of law. People make theirs based mostly on speculations and biases. I have my biases too in not completely agreeing with the SC decision, but in accepting it out of respect for the rule of law, I am also enlightened that the decision is correct because it recognizes the right of Congress to compel the appearance of cabinet officials, PROVIDED the investigations are done STRICTLY in aid of legislation.

We have seen how this congressional hearings have been abused that reduced it to a political roadshow which in the end produced nothing, but served well the interests of publicity seeking politicians. To mention just one among so many, the three senate committees that investigated Sen. Ping Lacson not long ago, concluded that kidnapping had been substantially established by prima facie evidence and released a joint report recommending the filing of kidnap-for-ransom and drug trafficking charges against Lacson. This was contained in Committee Report No. 66, a joint report of Committee chairs Senators Joker Arroyo, Magsaysay and the late Barbers. But through some political maneuvering the opposition refused to sign and release the report to save one of their own. Some of these senators are curently serving their terms and the very same ones who are screaming righteous indignation over the non-appearance of cabinet officials because of EO 464. Other investigations followed which produced a lot of political hyperboles but negative results much to the dismay of many thus, the clamor seeking the abolition of the Senate because it lost its integrity in the eyes of many people.

I wanted very much to see the fertilizer scam investigated and the scammers brought to court. If the involvement goes to the highest level and impeachment is not possible, there is still recourse with the Sandiganbayan by filing a case against everybody connected with the scam. It behooves the opposition to do this if all else fail. GMA can have her day when she steps down and removes her presidential immunity. Justice moves so slowly but I have the patience to wait.

baycas

April 21st, 2006 at 8:35 am

i’d rather have too much congressional follies than to have excessive executive secrecy that only demeans transparency and accountability in good governance.

our SC stressed: of much greater value is the Filipinos’ right to take part in government.

nixon then invoked executive privilege when he tried to keep the white house wiretaps from the US supreme court. the public’s right to information however prevailed. such similar incident should happen here particularly with an administration beleaguered for its illegitimacy and on an all-out effort to conceal its sins of the past.

we don’t deserve mlq’s hell…especially from a woman who lied, cheated, stole and did a cover-up!

April 21st, 2006 at 11:27 am

Toro said,
“But through some political maneuvering the opposition refused to sign and release the report to save one of their own.”

I do not consider Lacson as part of the real opposition. He is an opportunist. He must be tried for Kuratong, Dacer and other cases. He is a poison for the opposition. He is a nuissance opposition.

scud_1975

April 21st, 2006 at 11:31 am

A glass half-empty or a glass half-full..depende yan sa ating lahat kung paano tingnan ang desisyon ng SC. But in my honest opinion, tama lang ang naging desisyon nila..not all sections of EO 464 are unconstitutional, it is very clear in Article 6, Section 22 of the Philippine constitution that consent from the president is needed before they appear sa sinasabing investigation “in aid of legislation” daw ng Kongreso. At wag na rin tayong masyadong makulit, hindi lahat ng kailangan malaman dapat malaman..there are issues na dapat ang mga “Big Bosses” lang natin na mga politiko ang nakakaalam, that is the “Executive Privilege” of Gloria,,kahit ang mga Generals sa military may tinatawag na mga “coded messages” na sila lang ang dapat nakakaalam.

The oppositions are trying to put a happy face, pero kung babasahin ang 63 pages na desisyon ng SC..sila ang mas tinatamaan. That means hindi lahat ng impormasyon na gusto nilang kalkalin makukuha nila, bawas “pogi points” yan sa grandstanding cum investigations in aid of legislation. Kasi naman ang Presidente pa rin ang magsasabi kung ano ang mga “classified and confidential” issues na pang executive sessions lang..meaning, wag ka na magpapogi sa harap ng media Mr. Senator at ibulgar ang mga issues that matters with national security. And please lang Mr. Senator, pakirespeto ang mga resource persons cum suspects ninyo. Ngayon masaya na sila, hindi na kailangan ng consent galing kay Madam ang mga Military Officers sa imbestigasyon ng Senado..eh ang tanong, meron ba ulit na matapang gaya ni Gudani at Balutan na itataya ang career para makagawa ng magandang batas ang mga Honorable Mambabatas mula sa “Investigations in Aid of Legislation”? Eh kung wala rin lang kapalit na magandang batas na ipapasa, bakit mo pa itataya ang sarili mo na pag-initan ka ng mga nasa itaas. Common Sense!

Mabuti naman at natalakay ng SC ang “QUESTION HOUR” o mas kilala sa question period sa isang parliamentary system sa page 42. Yan ang kaibahan ng Presidential sa Parliamentary.. sa Parliamentary pwedeng questionin ng parliament ang mga desisyon ng Prime Minister at mga Gabinete. Ang Question Hour ang tinututukan ng media at ng mga tao sa mga bansang nasa ilalim ng Parliamentary System, dahil dito malayang nakakapagtanong kung ano nga ba ang mga dapat maliwanagan. So sa mga nagsasabi na nasa nakaupo lang ang problema at hindi sa sistema..magbasa muna tayo :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prime_Minister%27s_Questions
http://pcij.org/blog/wp-docs/SC-Decision-EO464.pdf

jinx

April 21st, 2006 at 11:46 am

21 April 2006

Friends,

Bottomline, the Senate or the House can now proceed to look at the Mayuga report. AS mike D said, magwalkout daw sya pag dating sa mga tanungan. Lakas talaga nga apog mo mike.

April 21st, 2006 at 12:07 pm

Juan Makabayan said,

“I do not consider Lacson as part of the real opposition. He is an opportunist. He must be tried for Kuratong, Dacer and other cases. He is a poison for the opposition. He is a nuissance opposition.”

My point is, the opposition some of whom are still serving their term today and hypocritically against 464 are the same people who protected Lacson and prevented justice from taking its course. That’s the height of hypocrisy.

joselu

April 21st, 2006 at 2:09 pm

The SC really just “fine tuned” EO 464.
In a way there are no real winners to the case but it seems to me the president still has the upper hand.
The problem still remains. It boils down to abuse of power of Congress. It boils down to an over ambitious Senate that will use any excuse to grab power.
The senators are playing around w/ the words “in aid of legislation”
What is the Senates track record in it’s endless investigations in aid of legislation?
There are so many laws that have to be passed but the senate never has the time to do so for whatever reasons!
We do have already so many laws that are gathering dust because our main problem is about implementation.
If 464 was part of a strategy the administraion used to gain so political peace, then it worked.
what we really need is some political peace so that the nation gets to do things that have a long term benifit to the majority of the people.

April 21st, 2006 at 2:39 pm

There’s nothing in the Mayuga Report that the House or Senate can use para makagawa ng bagong batas. And please, ang pangunahing trabaho ng mga Mambabatas ay gumawa ng batas na makakaangat ng buhay ng mga Pilipino mula sa kahirapan. Wag tayong maging naive, hindi dahil galit tayo kay Gloria nagbubulag-bulagan naman tayo sa mga pagkukulang ng Kongreso. Hindi lahat ng Pilipino naloloko nila sa kanilang “investigation in aid of legislation”. Meron ba makapagsasabi dito kung ilang batas ang naipasa nila sa loob ng tatlong taon na nanggaling sa kanilang imbestigasyon?

Ilan nga ba ang naipasang batas ng House at Senate ng taong 2005? Wala pang 10, pinakamababa sa kasyasayan sa Pilipinas!! Isa na jan ang Republic Act 9338 ( AN ACT GRANTING PHILIPPINE CITIZENSHIP TO MAHMOUD A. M. ASFOUR ). Geesuz!! yan ba ang klase ng mga batas na kailangan ng mga Pilipino? Tingnan natin ang General Appropriations 2005 (di pa kasama deficit)

Total New Appropriations, Senate and House = 4.5 Billion Pesos
Priority Development Assistance Fund (pork barrel) = 6.1 Billion Pesos
Halaga ng bawat Batas na naipasa = PRICELESS

“There are some things money can’t buy, for everything else there’s a MASTERCARD”

April 21st, 2006 at 4:20 pm

We do have already so many laws that are gathering dust because our main problem is about implementation.

…like the death penalty law with a blanket moratorium on its implementation then and a blanket commutation now.
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=73102&col=111

Huseng Bulag

April 21st, 2006 at 6:10 pm

joselu, GMA knows what it takes to gain political peace and EO464 didn’t give her such. In fact she already acknowledged it when she swore at the grave of Dr. Jose Rizal on Dec 2003 never to seek reelection because she was the reason for the divisiveness that pervaded the political atmosphere at that time. Simple, she steps down, there will be political peace.

Why step down and not resign? Because she is a usurper so she holds no real office from which to resign.

“over ambitious Senate that will use any excuse to grab power” When did it happen that any member of the senate moved to grab power? How will a senate inquiry result to a transfer of power? Senators holding high-powered firearms, holding Norberto Gonzales hostage and demanding GMA’s resignation?

If you are an honest man, hiding nothing from the public, you will welcome investigations and all kinds of questions because it will give you the opportunity to explain what you’ve done and to show the whole world how good a leader you are. Only cheats, liars and usurpers are afraid of inquiries. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

EO 464 runs contrary to “government of transparency” which they loved to shout during the elections.

April 21st, 2006 at 7:11 pm

Huseng bulag, I think it’s to simplistic to say that she is the reason for the divisivness.Lets face it.Certain groups & people where not happy when she took over from erap.But could not say much because the greater majority wanted to follow a constitutional proceses of change.
Again, your being so simplistic that she steps down & there will be political peace.
Firstly, we are a country w/ so many problems & so many “interest” fighting among each other so how can you over simplisticly conclude that her stepping down solve the problem.
Not that I want to contradic you in your opinion but for someone who is a usurper & holds no real office, how come then she is still in office after so many months?
Why do you think that dreamed-off tipping point never happened? Why are all those who hate her so much still doing a hard sell?
There must be a logical explanation w/o blameing the others.
I don’t know how you can explain the endless senate investigations in aid of legislation “kuno” that never go anywhere anyway. Why don’t they just call them “witchhunts”.
What do you call Drilons backstabbing when he knows very well that he is in line if only he made better calculations.
All politicians are not honest in the first place.
Do you remember the Enrile Madrigal quarel?
All politicians have their secrets.Each politician knows dirty secrets of the others.The politicians code of dishonor is “walang pakialaman”.
Politicians never act or behave because of what is right or wrong or moral.Politicans react according to what they have to gain.
Do you remember Guingonas “I accuse” expose in the Senate that started the ball moving on the erap impeachment? & you still think how can a power grab not start in the senate.
Do you remember Loren Legardas crying scene in the impeachment?
Those same people where celebrating w/ erap in his b-day.
Personaly, I don’t see our dirty world in such a simplistic manner w/o taking into account how rutten the system is & how equally dirty are those same people doing the so called “investigating”
I don’t think that at the dirty levels of our politics it’s just about nothing to hide nothing to fear.
It’s more about if you have the power you can be sure everybody will do everything to take it away from you.
It’s not about the good or bad.
It’s about the power!!!!!!!!!
EO 464 was ok for me because just as the senate accuses the executive of abusing it’s powers. Do you really think the senators are not abusing their powers too in their continous “witch hunts”?
W/ the kind of senate we have, who are not accontable to anyone & who are just perfroming for people. How sure are you what they do will give you a better life? Or are they just playing w/ your emotions & feelings & your thrist for intrigue & excitment?

April 21st, 2006 at 8:22 pm

If we have so many laws, then ano pa pala ang silbi ng mga Senador at Congressmen? Eh di gawin na lang natin Unicameral para naman makatipid tayo. We have problems in implementation and legislation, wag nating sayangin ang pagod natin kasisigaw na lahat sila umalis sa pwesto dahil di mangyayari yan, the best we can do is pukpukin sila ng parang pako para gumalaw. One more thing, mainis man tayo sa hindi pagtupad ni Gloria ng batas ng Death Penalty..ito naman ay “Constitutional” . Its her prerogative and one of her executive priveleges.

Philippine Constitution Articla VII, Section 19
Except in cases of impeachment, or as otherwise provided in this Constitution, the President may grant reprieves, commutations, and pardons, and remit fines and forfeitures, after conviction by final judgement.
He shall also have the power to grant amnesty with the concurrence of a majority of all the Members of the Congress.

April 21st, 2006 at 11:13 pm

joselu aka joey, the law on death penalty which lacks implementation is, in your own words, one of the many laws that gathered dust, huh? there really is a need to repeal some of our many laws.

on why she’s still in office? eo464 contributed in the political stalemate, don’t you think?

—–

scud, the operating word is blanket. mlq3 wrote about it in dec 2003 (link cited above). neal h. cruz also has this take:

In commutation of sentences, the case of each prisoner is carefully reviewed and if clemency is justified, the reasons are explained in the commutation message. A blanket commutation of all death sentences with no explanation at all on each case has never been done before.

Besides, before a prisoner’s death sentence can be commuted, he must first be convicted with finality by the Supreme Court. But the cases of fully three-fourths of the more than 1,000 prisoners given executive clemency are still being reviewed by the high court, and therefore they are not yet eligible for commutation of sentence. What President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo just did was not mere commutation but legislation. She arrogated unto herself the legislative powers of Congress. Ferdinand Marcos at least first abolished Congress before he assumed legislative powers, but Congress is still very much alive and kicking at present — although Ms Arroyo and the House of Representatives would very much prefer the Senate would disappear.

What she should have done first was to certify a bill to Congress to repeal the death penalty law. But she is doing that only now, after she had already committed her boo-boo…
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=73215&col=56

yes, why didn’t she do that (certify the abolition bills as urgent) back in 2001?

Ambuot Saimo

April 21st, 2006 at 11:30 pm

I see the decision in a different perspective. Although it looks like Gloria “lost” in part in said decision but I think this is part of a grand design of conditioning the mindset of the Filipinos that the Supreme Court is an “independent” entity. I hope i’m wrong but the the next stunner decision of the Supreme Court will be the upholding of the legality of administration’s call for Cha-Cha either thru the Government’s Initiative currently being spearheaded by the “Singaw” Ng Bayan or the conversion of congress into a constituent body as proposed by Jaraula wherein both houses will vote singly as opposed to separately. I don’t get it but even a change of a Barangay’s name requires separate concurrence of both houses and yet to change the fundament law only needs
single vote? But remember… it’s the Supreme Court- it can reverse itself anytime and no one can question it. It’s give & take baby!!!

April 22nd, 2006 at 4:05 am

*I must agree with you Ambuot. Its just a screen to condition the public of the SC’s independence. This is just a resolution and its not even final. So for the next 15 days, EO 464 still stands. Unless the administration decides not to file a motion for reconsideration, this will become final.

*If the senate has the “in aid of legislation”, GMA has the “rule of law”. The law which she and her cohorts give their own interpretation and manipulation. She also has “constitutionality”, her own constitution were she is above the people she is suppose to “SERVE”.

April 22nd, 2006 at 6:09 am

i shouted my barber’s predictions two days ago:

PP 1017 – moot and academic
CPR – unconstitutional; No permit-No rally – constitutional

Garci’s 2nd Petition — who knows?

SC rules:
1997 – fvr’s national ID system (A.O. 308) unconstitutional
2006 – gma’s “conditional” national ID system (E.O. 420) constitutional
1997 – PI lacks enabling law (note that it was not ruled as constitutional or not)
2006 – PI constitutional

no high hopes for me, though…just expecting what is expected…much like the unsurprising mayuga report.

this SC decision on eo464 doesn’t actually release the gridlock…for in the end the definable factor of executive privilege and the inquiry-in-aid-of-legislation determinant may eventually be elevated to the SC for another round of political deliberations and long-awaited decisions.

April 22nd, 2006 at 6:28 am

wrong tags, sorry.

Garci’s 2nd Petition ( http://philippinecommentary.blogspot.com/2005/12/freedom-and-garcis-second-petition.html )

tongue in, anew

April 22nd, 2006 at 6:32 am

Paano na yan mga peeps e di tuloy na gisahan sa senado. Pero bakit may mga tao dito na mainit sa mga senador? If you ask me, it’s the Lower House that’s wasting our money. Go ask your congressmen, or House employees, or frequent visitors how many times the plenary ever reached a quorum in the past months. Or the last 3 years, even. The senators may be few but are more statesman material than their House counterparts who attend sessions only when they sense they are about to be “fertilized”.

Remember Mike Enriquez’ cam guys who caught on video a House Rep’s staff delivering payroll to the congresswoman’s own employees? These are 15/30
(payday) a.k.a. “ghost”, employees, who are paid with our own tax money but rendering work in private enterprise. That Lady Rep from QC had about 14 such people in her payroll. How many other congressmen have done the same – listing on the official roster people who are supposed to work as staffmembers, consultants, aides, drivers, etc in the House of Representatives but actually serve in the Representative’s House? How much does this cost us in a year? It runs in the hundreds of millions, estimated with an average of 8 people per congressman.

Pati yung sinasabing House-approved bills na di nate-take up in the Senate na may isang libo daw, puro naman pala pagpapalit ng pangalan ng mga kalsada, building, eskwela, etc. Yung essential laws wala pa sa lima.

Mas mabuti na siguro at napilayan ang EO 464, mas nanaisin kong manood ng madalas sa mga imbestigasyon sa Senado, kesa magpuyat ng minsan sa Batasan kung saan puro Dura Lex, Sed Lex, at “we have crossed the Rubicon” ang namumutawi sa labi ng mga hacienderong sabungero na bagong-release ang
pork.

Sa Senado, marami kang matututunan, matutuklasang mga tagong lihim, mga bagay na ayaw ipaalam ni Gloria sa tao. Mula sa Good Ani ni Gudani, hanggang
sa “Gininto” ang Masaganang Ani ni GMA.

Pati na rin si Vicky, diba Ani, er.., Nani, este, Honey?

April 22nd, 2006 at 8:40 am

Hindi lang dito sa forum ang maraming inis sa senado. Batid mo ba ang damdamin ng nakararami sa labas ng forum na ito na napilitan silang sumangayon sa parliamentary upang mabuwag lang ang senado? Marami ka ngang natutunan sa mga imbestigasyon sa senado ngunit kahit isa ba ay may nakita kang nakulong o at least man lang na recommend nilang sampahan ng kaso sa Dept of Justice o Sandiganbayan? Umpisahan mo na sa Jose Pidal case. Bakit hanggang ngayon pagala gala pa si Mike Arroyo? Si Vicky Toh, etc? Pati na rin ang jueteng scandal na tumanggap daw ng suhol si Mikey, etc. Sama mo na rin si Lucio Co na bata at kasabwat daw ni MA sa smuggling according to Sen. Jinggoy. Ang dami pang iba.

Si Bishop Cruz ay nagharap sa senado ng maraming testigo tulad ni Sandra Cam, Boy Mayor, at iba pa na di natakot panindigan ang kanilang akusasyon laban kila father and son Arroyo pati si Iggy, bakit walang sinampang dimanda laban sa kanila. Ano ba ito matapos ang mahigpit at mainit na usapan sa senate investigations tapos wala na? Sino ba ang niloloko nila di ba mga tao? Hwag sabihin ninoman na kasi malakas na tao ang akusado sapagkat kung yan ang dahilan bakit nagawa nilang akusahan in the first place. Ganoon ba kadali na magakusa sa loob ng senado dahil meron silang immunity from suit ngunit sa labas nito hindi nila magawa. Dahil dyan maaalis mo ba ngayon na isipin ng tao na paraan lang nila yon para manira?

Ang ganang sa akin, ang trabaho ng senado, tulad din sa kongreso, ay ang gumawa ng batas, hindi iyong walang katapusang imbestigasyon kung kaya hindi na nila nagawa ang kanilang tungkulin. May karapatan silang alamin ang mga kaganapan sa alegasyon na corruption – in aid of legislation – at kung may katotohanan nga obligasyon nila sa tao na endorse ito sa Sandiganbayan upang sampahan ng kaso ang mga sangkot. Kung wala mang mangyari dito problema na yon ng Ombudsman/Sandiganbayan. At least ginawa ng senado ang kanilang obligasyon.

Nabanggit ko na rin ang nangyari sa Ping Lacson senate investigation na bukod-tangi sa lahat dahil may recommendation na ang 3 komite na sampahan ng kaso si Lacson ngunit pinirmahan ba ng opposition na kakampi ni Lacson ang committee report No. 66? Hindi rin. Sila mismo ang nagligtas ng kaalyado nila upang ito’y hindi makasuhan at baka makulong pa. Papano mo ngayon gagalangin ang mga senador sa kanilang kabuktutan. Tulad din ng pagkawala mo ng tiwala sa administration ni Gloria, bakit ka magtataka kung may mga taga dito na ayaw na rin magtiwala sa mga senador maging sa mababang kongreso?

April 22nd, 2006 at 9:40 am

Ano yun? Maraming natututunan sa senado?? Eh kahit mangmang wala nang matututunan sa senado, dahil lahat ng imbestigahan ng Senado bulgar na sa mga Pilipino.. Tama! halos lahat ng ipasang bills ng Mababang Kongreso puro pagpapalit ng pangalan ng mga kalsada sa distrito nila na wala ang mga Senador..kaya nga halos murahin na rin ng mga Pilipino ang mga Tongressmen dahil sa mga walang kwentang bills na yan ..eh yung mga anti-Gloria ba, kaya rin ba murahin ang mga tamad na Senador sa mga pagkukulang nila? At teka, ilang nga ba ang naipasang batas na nagmula sa mga Senador kumpara sa mga Congressmen..paramihan nga.

April 22nd, 2006 at 9:56 am

PS further to my 8:40 above,

At least sa lower house may naganap na mabuti sa Garci tape investigations nila ng magsampa sila ng kaso sa korte laban kay Garcillano for faking his passport and committing perjury. Bakit hindi ito gayahin sa senado sa mga naimbistigahan na nila? Ang akin lang, kung gusto may paraan, kung ayaw panay dahilan.

April 22nd, 2006 at 1:38 pm

i believe the operation of a law is blanket in nature and not a single person can subvert such law, more so, in a likewise blanket manner…blanket as what the palace pretender* is so fond of doing in her decisions and directives – quite similar to linus who’s always holding on to his security blanket.

gloria’s insecurities is not a wonder but the operation of blanket decisions and directives is somehow astonishing…

the blanket moratorium on death penalty law, though actually inherited from erap but definitely marred by her flip-flops
the blanket curtailment of rights caused by CPR, disregarding maximum tolerance entombed in BP880
the blanket gag of an EO numbered 464 (to borrow fr. bernas’ words in http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=73355
the blanket state of emergency, albeit brief
the blanket commutation of death sentences, flattering the critical Church…

gloria’s act of “blanketing” is truly a wonder considering she has a coterie of advisers who are experts in law thereby minimizing the chances of performing legal blunders. “blanketing” is probably tantamount to committing the fallacy of sweeping generalization.

…uhmm, but come to think of it…it is not really amazing that gloria is doing this “blanketing”…because they are all for a political reason…for self-perpetuation, that is…

have you ever wondered why there was blanket denial that the hello, garci tapes ever existed and that the conversations ever took place? why there was blanket refusal to uncover the mystery of the illegal taps (or intercepts) despite having lots of voices caught on reels of tape? why there was blanket conclusion that the spirit of garcillano’s sleight of hand in the 2004 election is already lost in our memories (because of all the cover-ups and smokescreens that malacañang has concocted)?

i guess, they never entered your mind (even for just a second)…if, until now, you’re still in bed with gloria, snug under her most expensive blanket…

*not only does gloria pretend to be the highest in the executive, she also feels she’s one of the smallest members of the legislative!

April 22nd, 2006 at 2:30 pm

I may share your views on what you justifiably feel about your blanket derision of gloria’s administration, the big difference is that I do not let this stop me from looking beyond the political distractions that prevent us from moving on. There are more urgent matters other than political that need to be done which I have been doing through active participation in civic activities nationwide. It gives me great personal satisfaction that I am doing my part in a more positive way to help this country move on than spend my time in non-stop whining which frankly I find unproductive and frustrating.

Nobody has to remind me of what’s wrong with this country. When things won’t happen when you wanted them to then shift to other things that do. We are wallowing in deep political shit. Just read this forum you read nothing but bad politics. Nobody has anything good to say about it except that Gloria is bad. So was Erap during his time, and ditto with Ramos, Cory and Marcos. Don’t we ever get fed up with politics?

lamok

April 22nd, 2006 at 3:10 pm

Toro said,

We are wallowing in deep political shit. Just read this forum you read nothing but bad politics. Nobody has anything good to say about it except that Gloria is bad. So was Erap during his time, and ditto with Ramos, Cory and Marcos. Don’t we ever get fed up with politics?

Hehehe. Do you know who is the “idol” in this forum? All the other’s are bad…but if you start talking about revolutionary government…and how great crispin beltran is….well…… I hope you get my drift.

It is really hopeless….that is why…no matter what “they” do….kahit pa lumuha ng dugo…people will not do another people power? Para saan? The economy is doing great! The peso is up. Companies are hiring. We are now far from being “the Argentina”. Despite oil going 75 per barrel…the economy GDP is expected to go up 5%.

If you ask businessman/investors from all over….all they say is…Philippines as investment site is risky…it is not stable because of too much politics. Actually, the thing that is stopping us from really moving forward…is everybody’s greed for power! and too much politics.

Phil Cruz

April 22nd, 2006 at 3:12 pm

I would rather have the Senate now doing its check and balance functions instead of its legislating work – if only to block the abuses of this Administration and the House.

If the House wants the Senate to focus on legislation, they should stop this silly and wasteful practice of changing the names of roads and streets and then dumping it on the Senate’s lap.

Same goes for Gloria. If Gloria wants the Senate to spend more time on legislation, then she should stop all her shenanigans and shady deals and abuse of our democratic and human rights.

I am not exactly an admirer of the Senate myself at times, but this time their time is well-spent just blocking Gloria’s and the House’s evil schemes. Their time is well spent at the moment.

April 22nd, 2006 at 4:39 pm

Contrary to the belief that removing the senate is to remove check and balance in govt is a myth. Even in parliamentary there will always be check and balance for as long as there is a strong two party system because the minority party will function as the opposition.

jr_lad

April 22nd, 2006 at 4:50 pm

Toro said,
April 22, 2006 @ 9:56 am

toro, isa si senador lacson sa nagsampa ng kaso laban kay garci. http://www.pcij.org/blog/?p=751

April 22nd, 2006 at 5:04 pm

Tama ka dyan, si Lacson ay sumama sa mga kongresista na magsampa ng kaso laban kay Garci ngunit bakit hindi kabilang sila Pimentel, Drilon etc. Alam ng mga minority congressmen na hindi sila makakalusot na magpass ng resolution against Garci ng hindi babarahin ng majority. Tingnan mo ang ginawa nila. Silang mga batang kongresista ang nagsampa ng kaso directo mismo sa fiscal. Bakit di ito ginawa ng mga senador sila pa namang opposition majority ngayon doon sa Pidal at jueteng scandal. Tulad nga ng sinabi ko, kung gusto may paraan.

lokalokang matino

April 22nd, 2006 at 7:42 pm

Huseng Bulag,

I fully agree with everything you’e said. In fact a clean, honest, honorable person should encourage investigations and fact finding efforts.

ONLY A GUILTY PERSON WOULD AVOID ANY INVESTIGATION.
If you are a person welding tremendous power and influence, blocking / preventing investigation is grossly anomalous, THAT IS OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE. Obstruction of justice is one of the articles of impeachment against President Nixon.

April 22nd, 2006 at 8:47 pm

kahit sabihin pang sa kabuuan ay constitutional yang e.o. 464. ang mahalaga lamang ay yung sections 2(b) and 3 ay naideklara na invalid ng SC. yan lang naman ang importante diyan na tinututulan ng kontra administrasyon dahil sa paggamit ng pamahalaan upang huwag maisapubliko ang mga pang-aabuso neto sa kapangyarihan. ang section 1 of EO 464, “Cabinet officials must seek the permission of the president before appearing in any congressional inquiry” ay talaga namang sinusunod yan ng mga opisyal. puede ba naman basta na lang aattend si norberto gonzales doon sa senado ng hindi nagpapaalam kay gloria? at yang section 1(a) “envoking of the executive previlege” ay matagal ng nandiyan sa constitution hindi na bago yan at walang kumukuwestiyon diyan basta talagang involve ang national security at public safety.
so huwag ng sabihing parehong wagi ang dalawang panig sa desisyon ng SC. maliwanag talo ang administrasyon sa usaping eto sa pagkadeklara ng SC na unconstitutional ang pagkasingit sa sections 2(B) & 3. ang desisyon ng SC ay tinanggap ni mike defensor at puede lamang daw akusahan na abusado ang gobyerno kung patuloy na ipapatupad eto.

kaya sa sinasabi ng iba na “huwag makulit”, pag sinabi na hindi puedeng malaman ng publiko, hindi puede (executive privilege)! yan pag lumitaw si bolante sabihin niya, “hindi puede, i envoke executive privilege!”.

April 22nd, 2006 at 9:08 pm

Bolante cannot invoke executive privelege..only the President can

April 22nd, 2006 at 9:44 pm

Tingin ko magkakalabuan na naman pagdating na sa hearing. Saan ang hangganan ng in aid of legislation. Sino ang makapagsasabi na ang mga gustong malaman ng senador ay sumasaloob pa rin ng in aid of legislation o ito’y labas na. Abangan sa next hearing and you will know what I mean.

April 22nd, 2006 at 10:07 pm

“Bolante cannot invoke executive privelege..only the President can”.

i don’t think so. sino ba ang nakasalang ang presidente? read the paragraphs above regarding invoking executive privilege.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>

“There are so many laws that have to be passed but the senate never has the time to do so for whatever reasons!

We do have already so many laws that are gathering dust because our main problem is about implementation.”

-so what’s your point joselu? it seems your above statements contradict each other. you want more laws or the existing laws are enough since they are just gathering dust and are not even implemented? why then push for more laws?

April 22nd, 2006 at 10:21 pm

Again, the Supreme Court said.. Only the President can invoke the executive privelege ,but even the president must state the reasons for invoking the privilege. So, kung gustong ipatawag ng Senado si Bolante para magkaroon ng Investigation in Aid of Legislation (kuno!) hindi pwede i-invoke ni Bolante ang executive privelege.

As for the laws na sinabi ni joselu, comment ko lang. Ikumpara na lang natin ang mga batas natin sa lumang damit.

freewheel

April 22nd, 2006 at 10:23 pm

agree fully with phil cruz comment.

folly, it is- the idea of having Senate abolished will pave way to country’s greatness. the proponents are, surely must be sick from an illness, called deliberate partial recognition of concrete conditions.

Lamok, said: Apr. 22/ 3:10 pm

“…how great crispin beltran is…”

am not certain how you regard the man, unfortunately, i do not get your drift. but in my book, certainly, he is ten times, at the least, greater in terms of delicadeza compared to Abalos of Comelec, Gonzalez of Justice Dept., and Bunye of the Palace ( too many, to bother mentioning them all).

“…economy is doing great!…. GDP is expected to go up 5%…”

check conditions yourself, within 10 kilometers radius from Malacanan, for starters. read and reflect on UNICEF and UNDP reports, post on Wowowee, and other PCIJ reports, as supplement.
and, oh…the economy and GDP rah, rah – heard them too, long time ago. when will we ever learn, that these indicators are only partial and does NOT present nor indicative of the whole economic condition of a country? ask any student who understand the concept of developmental economics.

happy reading.

April 22nd, 2006 at 10:27 pm

I have my doubts if Bolante can still invoke executive privilege when he is no longer a cabinet member or officially the President’s alter ego.

April 22nd, 2006 at 10:50 pm

Comment ko lang sa trabaho ng mga Congressmen sa pagpapalit ng mga pangalan ng kalsadana kinaiinisan ng lahat.

Nakasaad sa Local Government Code of 1991 by Sen. Pimentel, kapangyarihan yan ng mga Tongressmen. Roads can be categorized as Provincial Road, City Road, Municipal Road, Barangay Road. Kung ikaw ay isang Congressman sa distrito mo at ang mga kalsada mo ay puro Barangay Road lang, sigurado nasa 6th class municipality..at sigurado rin na ang budget para sa municipality mo maliit pa sa buto ng kamatis. So ano ang dapat gawin? upgrade your roads, pahabain mo..palakihin mo at gumawa ng batas para palitan ang mga kalsada upang madagdagan ang budget para sa mga constituents mo. Wag sana tayo maging kasing bobo ni Sen. Bong Revilla na hindi alam kung ano ang impact ng mga kalsada sa mga lugar na tinitirahan natin. Ask any surveyors or engineers..alam dapat nila yan.

April 23rd, 2006 at 11:40 am

i learned in high school social studies that ideas, whether in the past or present and whether written or spoken, must be taken with utmost regard and discernment. it is important that we integrate into ourselves the good ones and liberate the bad ones. this is how i deal with a lot of information downloaded to my hard disk of a brain.

arturo, i find your viewpoints well thought of and coming from a well-meaning citizen. although i differ in some of them, i fully respect your stand. besides, i find it a useless task arguing and trying to impose one’s idea to another, especially when each mind is already cemented to a particular belief or opinion. it’s worth mentioning, however, that i’ve also integrated in me some of your views…and i thank you for them.

if you may recall, i usually address my comments to you (or to whoever) if the need arises but oftentimes, i post generic comments (for everyone’s consumption). so, my previous post is not intended as a reminder to you (for i know you don’t need it anymore as i have clarified your stand re: gloria in the past and somehow got to know you already based on your viewpoints on other issues). you may consider my previous comment as a batu-bato sa langit…

i congratulate you on your endeavor (probably it took your time the past months owing to the scarcity of Toros in the blogposts) and, now that you’ve said it, i see you are really patriotic as i have gathered from your past comments. rest assured that i am also doing my share as a citizen (which i hope everyone here is doing too) even to the extent of sharing my talents to the community for a measly sum or gratis.

yes, baycas would like to stay vigilant on the excesses of the one who wields stolen power. but it doesn’t mean he is just focused on this futile exercise (as you may consider) for he has a life of his own and happily contributing for the betterment of other lives he encounters. this gives baycas more the right to do this as he doesn’t remain idle and unproductive as one may perceive.

April 23rd, 2006 at 11:41 am

in response to mlq3’s quote of the day in January:

A lot of our people who belong to the best elements will have nothing to do with politics because they believe it is dirty. In other words, they leave politics to those who are not so clean, and then wonder why the government does not run as well as it should; the opposition to have anything to do with it, they say, is that they themselves may get contaminated. – Joaquin “Chino” Roces…

i posted this:

ever considered the phrase “cleaned by politics” (or “cleaned with politics”) rather than “tainted by politics” (or “tainted with politics”)?

…makes one think that “dirty politics” is plainly pleonastic.

pleonastic means redundant…as in saying “bad lies” or “rotten politician.” i think gone are the days when we consider politics as good…only bad.

i patiently wait the day when we can wake up one morning and exclaim “politics is good.”

…not in my lifetime probably…but hopefully, in my second-born’s life.

just a rejoinder to my blanket derision:

why the hell am i overly nagging about a blanket when in reality it’s scorching out there and we really don’t need a blanket at present?

well, that’s the point…‘cause we really don’t need gloria’s blanket decisions and directives now…and perhaps even in the coming rainy months.

re: bolante…

besides being a private individual now, joc-joc is already in hiding and couldn’t possibly speak out even just to say “i have the right to remain silent.” (bill of rights – right against self-incrimination)

(that’s all for now. thanks, pcij.)

April 23rd, 2006 at 12:56 pm

freewheel said,

crispin beltran is in my book, certainly, is ten times, at the least, greater…see the drift now? You mean, you did’nt get my drift? Oh..really, well…

So…what’s stopping you from proposing to make Crispin a candidate for president…and for good measure make Satur as Bise….now you get my drift? hehehe.

another is,

“check conditions yourself, within 10 kilometers radius from Malacanan….”

Oh….was it better during erap time? during ramos? or marcos? Ceratinly it can’t be worsier! hehehe.

So you don’t believe in positive 5% GDP growth? What do you believe in? if indeed, hehehe. Wht else there is to measure growth…since you are an economic teacher….if you dont believe in it….then, I pity, not you, but your students…

Happy reading to you.

April 23rd, 2006 at 1:06 pm

So you don’t believe in positive 5% GDP growth?

What would you believe in? Would rather believe if the target, not just of banks, IMF etc was a negative -10% GDP growth? Would you?

hehehe

April 23rd, 2006 at 1:09 pm

utak lamok ang mga legal adivisers ni gloria. kaya sabi ni father bernas dapat magresign na ang mga eto. mantakin nyo naman ang executive privilege ay gagamitin sa katergorya ng tao sa gobyerno at hindi sa klase ng inpormasyon? ano yun lahat ng napapag-usapan diyan sa executive branch ay puro classified information and concerning national security & public interest?

at bakit iaapela pa? kaya pa bang baguhin ng malacanang ang desisyon ng SC tungkol dito sa sections 2(b) & 3? again, mga bobo nga ang mga legal advisers ni gloria.

citing bolante above was actually more of a pun although not so long ago while benipayo is defending eo 464, he cited that past and present govt officials are covered by eo 464. and the way it goes, it seems na ang nagpalakas ng loob ni joc-joc-joc na hindi siputin ang mga summons ng congress ay dahil sa eo 464.

>>>>>>>

executive privilege is not just about the president’s privilege but about the members of the executive branch justifying withholding of documents and information from other branches of government. http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/e1/executiv-pr.asp

again, from above post regarding executive privilege.

“It follows, therefore, that when AN OFFICIAL is being SUMMONED by CONGRESS on a matter which, in HIS OWN judgment, might be COVERED by EXECUTIVE PRIVILEGE, he must be afforded reasonable time to INFORM the President or the Executive Secretary of the POSSIBLE NEED FOR INVOKING the privilege. This is necessary in order to provide the President or the Executive Secretary with fair opportunity to consider whether the matter indeed calls for a claim of executive privilege,” the decision stated.

April 23rd, 2006 at 6:38 pm

Points well taken, Baycas. I would not consider it a useless effort on your part to argue a point because you feel my mind is already closed to other ideas. On the contrary, my mind is never closed to any thing that makes good sense. How many times have I been enlightened by other people’s opinions too. I welcome reactions to what I write, approvingly or not, because when I elicit or provoke a response it means there are others who pay attention to what I say. I’d rather have that than if people pay no mind to what I write.

Yes, my activities had kept me away for a while but that should not make you or anyone here less patriotic. What all of us do here expressing our awareness and concerns is manifestation of our patriotic duty for country and people.

April 24th, 2006 at 5:55 pm

lamok,

for some incomprehensible reason, ‘ Pinas has unwanted surplus of practitioners of squid tactics- individuals who make a living out of muddling issues to prevent people from discerning the truth from heaps of social and political issues. please do not freely join the kind.

as to ur latest post, it is now apparent, you must have been bitten by some bug- for how can i explain your hysteria bringing in a topic which is off-tangent from the thread above? if i may remind, putting words into other blogger’s thoughts is a cheap trick (for nowhere did i propose mr. beltran run for president?), often resorted to by those who run out of lucid arguments. it is not looked upon too kindly, anywhere. PCIJ, its readers, and fellow bloggers deserves a better treatment.

but do not despair just yet, if what you wrote is a product of a conscience stricken soul and must insist that your ideas should be heard too, i suggest post ur comments under the category ‘in the news’ dated feb. 27 whose topic is Mr. Beltran. i am more than willing to start a dialogue.

April 24th, 2006 at 7:52 pm

freewheel,

You really reply is condesending hehehe, hirap maabot. I am glad there’s internet enabling us lowly minded people to converse and mingle with the “high” type of species, whtever that means.

Off tangent? replying to your points presented? and your reply above, is it “on tangent”? Well…

” for nowhere did i propose mr. beltran run for president?” To quote what I said:

” So…what’s stopping you from proposing to make Crispin a candidate for president…and for good measure make Satur as Bise….now you get my drift? hehehe.”

Obviously…you did’nt get my drift with that “high” mind of yours. And your talking about lucidity..hello? hehehe.

have you forgotten to take your meds today, freewheel?

jester-in-exile

April 24th, 2006 at 8:04 pm

baycas said:

“re: bolante… besides being a private individual now, joc-joc is already in hiding and couldn’t possibly speak out even just to say “i have the right to remain silent.” (bill of rights – right against self-incrimination)”

even in his capacity as a former official and regarding a matter of public interest?

off-topic: oui sont bloggers de arlegui? voici, i suppose.

naykika

April 24th, 2006 at 9:02 pm

here is a suggestion. re:bolante may invoke or may not invoke the Executive privelege (EO 464) but surely he can break it. The sure fire to challenge any law is to break it. Be it an executive order, statutory law or even a contitutional provision. Heard of it before?

April 24th, 2006 at 10:01 pm

naykika,

well, that’s what bolante is doing challenging the law by not attending the senate hearings inspite of all those summons. executive privilege is not even applicable to the fertilizer fund scandal that he’s involve with. that just shows he will do anything to protect his former boss. no way that he’ll turn against gloria. not even his fellow rotarians can persuade him to attend the senate hearings and shed light to this scandal and in effect clear his name also. it just shows also how inutil congress is.

April 25th, 2006 at 1:50 am

jester,

arturo said: I have my doubts if Bolante can still invoke executive privilege when he is no longer a cabinet member or officially the President’s alter ego and i said: besides being a private individual now…

i understand a former official of the executive could no longer invoke executive privilege. in the same token, even high executive officials couldn’t compel him to appear in congressional hearings as he is no longer a public official (although they surely won’t if ever they could!).

i continued: …joc-joc is already in hiding and couldn’t possibly speak out even just to say “i have the right to remain silent.”

joc-joc, in his absence, doesn’t have to hide under the executive privilege skirt anymore. physical absence is one strategy often employed by people hiding something (maybe we can also ask gringo on this). if ever he’ll be charged in court, flight means guilt principle must apply.

if ever he miraculously surface, i expect a cry of the patented carlos garcia’s (the major general of a problem) right against self-incrimination from him…

you know, for a rotarian, joc-joc really knows how to give the run-around.

who will determine executive privilege?
who will determine if an information has to be disclosed in the interest of the public?
who will eventually break the impasse that will ensue come third week of May at the resumption of the hearings?

the supreme court, of course, the last orbiter…as in orbit: to run in circles around us!

my barber said: no winners here (in this SC decision)…magkamali sana siya at ang taumbayan nawa ang magwagi.

April 25th, 2006 at 6:41 am

Good question, Baycas. My take on that is, if ever Bolante shows up at senate hearing, he will raise the issue of executive privilege of the President which I think would be his only defense to prevent the senate from extracting any info from him. If push comes to shove, he may elect to spill all in an executive session which means the discussion will not be made public. He may also try to invoke his being a plain citizen, but I doubt if this will work since he is a principal in the alleged fertilizer anomaly. Invoking the exec privilege throws the issue back to Gloria who now must explain convincingly, if she invokes her right to EP, why she cannot reveal the info being asked. (I cannot see how she can do it when there’s no imaginable state secrets or threat to national security involved in disclosing details of the fertilizer scam.) Two options Gloria can do here. Either she gives up the EP and allows Bolante to tell all (and puts himself in deeper trouble, he can invoke self-incrimination defense though) or tosses the issue to the Supreme Court again to resolve the question (her legal advisers are not bobo contrary to what others think. Didn’t her 464 effectively stopped dead on their tracks the investigations on North Rail, Venable, Ong-Doble-Isafp, CRP, Garci, Agri-fertilizer scam for months, that gave them the confidence to issue 1017? Tell me that’s not a clever move that stymied the opposition. Are you listening Roilo Golez? But, I digress.)

If this happens expect the SC to sit on the issue for at least a month, and all this waiting, plus the usual 10 or 15 days to respond and apply for recon, will take much time that I think will work well into the timetable of the administration because the parliamentary may already be in place and the senate is abolished by the time the senators are ready to resume the hearings. Neat, huh.

If the Senators are hoping to get Bolante to a hearing in second half May I don’t see how they can do that either. They could not get him since December why would he show up in May when the session in the Senate is almost over and will call it sine die in June. Why can’t they do a reprise of what the minority congressmen did instead. Realizing their inability to pass a resolution against Garci without being blocked by the majority, they went to the fiscal and filed charges of faking his passport and perjury against Garci. That’s how to get an alleged crook by hook or by any other means. But, the senators will not do that. Not without the glare of TV lights they cannot grandstand. And to think they already have solid evidence to nail Bolante and explode the scam from Malacanang to eternity whether he is here or abroad!

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » CPR policy ‘unconstitutional’ — SC

April 25th, 2006 at 5:50 pm

[…] The Supreme Court’s decision on CPR follows its April 20 ruling that partially voided EO 464, which clipped Congressional powers by prohibiting senior executive and military officials from appearing in Congress without the president’s permission. The CPR policy was announced by Malacañang in September last year, following anti-government protests that began as the Gloriagate controversy broke out (here and here) and continuing amid the Congressional hearings on impeachment charges against the President. The impeachment charges were killed in July. […]

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » Cha-cha won’t happen this year — Fr. Bernas

April 28th, 2006 at 1:28 pm

[…] On April 20, the Supreme Court partially voided EO 464, issued by President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo September last year clipping the powers of Congress to summon executive officials to its inquiries. Five days after, the Court issued its opinion on the administration’s policy on rallies, saying CPR has no place in the country’s “legal firmament” and should not be used to abuse government’s authority to regulate assemblies. […]

May 3rd, 2006 at 5:18 am

…and they (the palace jesters) even resorted to eo464 which the orbiters (the SC) struck down partially!

eh, di na pala kailangan…just pretend you have AIDS (as if doing something) so you won’t have to appear in senate:

Teves, Favila and Buñag did not invoke EO 464. They were attending other meetings, according to their subordinates.

Recto’s committee was tackling bills on the reduction of individual income tax rates, the rationalization of fiscal incentives and measures to curb smuggling.

Lower-ranking officials
Only a director, Malou Recente, came to represent Teves, who was reportedly in India.

Trade Undersecretary Elmer Hernandez attended on behalf of Favila, who was supposedly at a Cabinet meeting.

Reynoso Floreza of the Bureau of Internal Revenue said that his immediate boss was at another meeting and that he did not know where Buñag was.

Customs Commissioner Napoleon Morales came late.

http://news.inq7.net/nation/index.php?index=1&story_id=74475

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » Liberty and prosperity should blossom hand in hand — Chief Justice

May 18th, 2006 at 5:27 pm

[…] The chief justice referred to three recent decisions issued by the Supreme Court in the last month: invalidating major provisions of Executive Order No. 464; upholding the people’s right to peaceably assemble and seek redress for grievances and shooting down the government’s Calibrated Preemptive Response policy; and upholding the civil liberties of the people under a state of national emergency, as issued through Presidential Proclamation 1017. […]

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » Gov’t asks Supreme Court to reconsider ruling on EO 464

May 18th, 2006 at 8:00 pm

[…] INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories: Liberty and prosperity should blossom hand in hand — Chief Justice […]

INSIDE PCIJ: Stories behind our stories » Comelec bars officials from attending legislative hearings

May 24th, 2006 at 6:33 pm

[…] Last month the Supreme Court, resolving petitions filed before it, invalidated major provisions of EO 464, saying Congress can compel the appearance of these officials, so long as investigations are done in aid of legislation. […]

Supreme Court partially voids EO 464

60 Responses to Supreme Court partially voids EO 464

Comment Form

Read More