The youth are hungry for truth. And they are not the unquestioning zombies that some people like to depict them. In fact, they asked me some very tough questions.
Yesterday, I was highly privileged to talk to at least 700 high school and college students, the top administration officials, faculty and employees of the University of the East Manila and Caloocan.
I was the only speaker and my topic was – Martial Law? Never Again.
Students of University of the East Caloocan and Manila at the Convocation where I deliver the keynote speech “Martial Law? Never Again. Thanks to @Nelson Agoyaoy for this photo.
My thanks to UE Professor Nelson Agoyaoy for the photos which he posted on Facebook.
Here is what I shared with the UE Community:
Good morning.
First of all, I would like to thank
President Ester Garcia,
Executive Vice President Carmelita Mateo,
Dr. Linda Santiago, Chancellor of the University of the East Manila
Dr. Zosimo Battad, Chancellor of University of the East Caloocan,
Director Rogelio Espiritu, the Convocation’s organizing committee chair
His co-chair, Principal Marilou Alonzo,
the professors, teachers, employees and students of University of the East
for making this happen.
It is a privilege for me to talk to all of you today to commemorate Edsa People Power – an event that happened 31 years ago before most of you were not yet born.
In preparing to talk to you, I tried to put myself in your shoes and see Edsa from your perspective. I guess for most of you, Edsa is similar to the way my parents used to talk to me about the Liberation of Manila from the Japanese invaders.
And yet, Edsa – or the liberation of the Filipino people from a dictatorship – was different from the Japanese Occupation.
You somehow expect a foreign invader to be cruel to those they conquer.
But you never ever expect your own President to be cruel to his own people. That was what Ferdinand Marcos, his family and his generals did. By the end of 14 years of Martial Law, there were 3,257 killed – you know, just like the deaths under investigation today. There were 35,000 tortured and 70,000 jailed.
Many of those jailed, tortured and killed were your age.
Just to give you an idea of how horrible Marcos’ Martial Law was. In a forum in Manila just like this, a student who was the same age as you questioned Imee Marcos why she was appointed to head Kabataang Barangay by her own father. His name was Archimedes Trajano and he was 21. Imee then was also 21. There was an underlying insinuation in Trajano’s question. Imee’s father had issued Presidential Decree 805 punishing nepotism or the appointment of relatives. Trajano ended up dead with torture marks all over his body.
Trajano’s mother never filed a case in court. She was too afraid. Instead, she migrated to Hawaii. Years later, the Marcoses fled there and she found a way to sue Imee Marcos for damages for the death of her son.
You know the argument that Imee Marcos used? She had taken up law and was once a student of my father who was a University of the Philippines law professor. You know what argument she used before the Hawaii court? She and her lawyers did not deny that Trajano was tortured. Instead, they argued that as agents of the state, the soldiers who killed Trajano were immune from suit in a foreign state.
Another student who was in high school was also tortured and his body dropped from a helicopter. His crime? He happened to be the son of Marcos’ former propaganda minister Primitivo MIjares who had fled to the United States and turned whistle blower.
Now the Marcos children and their supporters are trying with all their might to convince you that these are merely perceptions. They like to say – “winners rewrite history and those who won in Edsa are the ones writing the history” which puts the Marcoses in a very bad light.
Not true. Primitivo Mijares wrote all about the Marcoses’ shenanigans during Martial Law and he paid with his life.
In addition, what happened was the exact opposite. The winners failed to write the true history of Martial Law and Edsa. You can count on your fingers the memoirs that have been written by the major players who made Edsa happen. For instance, the late President Corazon Aquino once told me she was writing an autobiography but she never published whatever it is she wrote. Last July, I asked former President Fidel V. Ramos to please write his own memoir but apparently he had already donated his library to a university. He was not about to write and tell all. Fortunately, his former aide General Jose Almonte wrote his memoirs and spilled a lot about Ramos.
Interestingly, even Imelda or Imee or Bongbong Marcos, who have lots of stories to tell, have not written anything about their lives in Malacañang Palace and after. You should ask them why.
However, Marcos’ military aide, Colonel Arturo Aruiza did, and he provided a rare glimpse of the family’s life especially in exile.
This brings me to why I wrote this book Marcos Martial Law: Never Again.
I was never a student activist. I never joined rallies. I was never detained or tortured. So why did I write this?
Because I saw and was alarmed that the real story about Martial Law was fading and slowly being revised by the Marcoses. Sometime in late 1981, I joined Business Day newspaper. I wrote what I then thought was really boring stuff – special reports about taxes, the educational system, labor and unemployment. But it put bread on my table.
Then suddenly Ninoy Aquino died. Weeks before he died, Imelda Marcos had warned him not to come home because he might end up dead. And so when he ended up dead, millions of Filipinos were shocked and wondered why the Marcoses with a vast military at their service could not prevent a lone gunman from sneaking in and shooting Ninoy in a tightly guarded area of the airport.
Unless – and it was this horror that filled my mind then and the mind of many Filipinos – unless Ninoy was salvaged – or killed by the military. This brought home to me the impunity of Martial Law.
At that time, I knew that salvaging and torture were going on but I did not really understand the gravity of the situation. Seeing for myself Ninoy’s bloodied body made me realize that there was so much I did not know about the regime.
I wasted no time trying to find out more. And that’s how I accidentally got into political reporting. I was lucky to have started out as a reporter in Business Day, where I was trained to get not only both sides but as many sides as I could.
It is this training, honed by nearly three decades as a reporter, that I have brought to use in my book. Here, you will not only read about those who were tortured and killed. You will also read about Marcos, Imelda and their generals from their their own points of view.
I also tried to use documents from that era. So the accounts of torture I have used in this book were not just from those victims who have recently filed claims before the Human Rights Claims Board. It’s a lie that Bongbong Marcos has thrown against the human rights victims. That they are telling their stories of torture because they are only after the money.
No. On the contrary, most of the accounts I used here are those the torture victims themselves told Amnesty International, the International Commission of Jurists and the World Council of Churches at that time.
I was curious and I hope your Chancellor, Linda Santiago, forgives me for what I’m about to tell you. One of the primary source documents I used was Amnesty International’s Mission Report of 1975. After I had agreed to be a speaker I went back to the Amnesty Report to verify the arrest of your Chancellor, Linda Santiago.
Here is what Amnesty International documented about the arrest of Dr. Roger Posadas and his wife Linda Santiago Posadas. I quote:
“Dr Roger POSADAS: a recent example of arrest and detention
Arrested 12 January 1976, and was taken with his wife and three-year old son to a “safe house” for “tactical interrogation”. Amnesty International was informed that Dr Posadas was subjected to fist blows, kicks and struck with a pistol during interrogation for a period of one week. He was then kept incommunicado in the “safe house” for more than two months before transfer to a detention center.
His wife Linda Santiago Posadas was stripped and was reported to have been held for six hours with her three-year old son in an especially cold air-conditioned room. Mrs Posadas, aged 28, was granted “temporary release” on 20 June 1976 after more than five months’ detention without trial.”
Amnesty wrote that Dr. Posadas, a well-known physicist specializing in general relativity theory, was regarded by the authorities as a subversive. The report did not say whether Linda Santiago was one too.
The argument of the Marcoses and their supporters today is that they all had it coming because they were subversives and were trying to overthrow the government.
What I found out was that – yes, many of those tortured were rebels.
But did they have it coming?
No, because Marcos himself went out of his way to make the Philippines co-sponsor a landmark resolution before the United Nations General Assembly on December 9, 1975. The Resolution was called the “Declaration on the Protection of all Persons from Being subjected to Torture and other Cruel Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment.” [NOTE: You can read the Resolution yourself by clicking here.]
By sponsoring this anti-torture resolution on the UN General Assembly floor, Marcos agreed not to use torture even in “exceptional circumstances” such as internal political instability. In effect, he promised to the world that that he would not torture communist rebels who were trying to overthrow him or Muslim rebels who were trying to secede.
So the argument now being used – that communist rebels had it coming to them because they were trying to topple Marcos – doesn’t hold water in Marcos’ case.
Not only that. On October 16, 1979, Marcos issued Proclamation 1914, wherein he promised to comply with the UN Resolution against torture. According to Amnesty International the Philippines was one of a handful of governments which had promised to do so. [NOTE: You can read Marcos’ Proclamation 1914 by clicking here.]
But of course he was lying.
You have also read Marcos supporters saying that Marcos had to impose Martial Law because of the communist threat. The US has now declassified a substantial amount of confidential records from that era. One of the cables sent by US Ambassador Henry Byroade to Washington shortly before Martial Law was declared stated that Marcos agreed with Byroade’s assessment that the communist rebels were not a threat. [NOTE: You can read Byroade’s declassified cable yourself by clicking here. See Paragraph No. 10.]
Sure, Communist Party of the Philippines founder Jose Maria Sison could muster over a hundred thousand students to protest in the streets of Manila. Sure, there were bombings and the police detained at least one suspected bomber who turned out to be a soldier. Sure, there were 9,000 men belonging to the Communist Party and its armed group the New People’s Army.
But such a number was hardly enough to overthrow Marcos. When he declared Martial Law, his real motives became apparent when he announced that he had imposed Martial Law in order to “save the Republic and build a New Society.”
Well, saving the Republic is one of the justifiable conditions for Martial Law. But building a New Society was not in the 1935 Constitution as a reason for Martial Law.
Martial Law was meant to be an extreme measure to meet an emergency. And when that emergency is passed, Martial Law was supposed to be lifted. But Marcos only lifted his Martial Law in 1981 – or nine years later.
To prepare for this talk, I asked Mr. Edilberto Sulat, Jr. the university relations officer, to ask students for questions they might like to ask.
Let me tell you, the 13 questions sent to me are very tough questions and for that I commend you. Three of the questions went this way. I will try to answer them one by one.
First question: What was the first assignment of the soldiers when Martial Law was declared?
Their first assignment was to arrest 30,000 men and women who were top political opponents of Marcos, prominent media men and university professors critical of him or who were leftists; shut down Congress, TV stations, newspapers and magazines.
General Ramon Montaño told me in an interview that on the night they did arrests he regretted sending Colonel Rolando Abadilla to Channel 2 because he mauled everyone inside the TV station. Colonel Abadilla was often cited as the military officer who tortured a lot of detainees.
The second question I was asked was – Is it true that during Martial Law, everyone was disciplined?
The answer is – no. For instance, discipline rapidly broke down in the military. With no Congress to check its actions, many military officers used their power to accumulate wealth and conduct illegal activities.
Senator Panfilo Lacson told me that for some generals the discipline only lasted a few months. Some of them spotted ways to make money out of arresting political and non-political prisoners. Lacson said he heard of one million to two million pesos changing hands because it was so easy to arrest anyone. Officers were given Arrest Search and Seizure Orders (ASSO) pre-signed by Marcos or his loyal aide General Fabian Ver whom he named the spy chief.
Another question – Why did Martial Law lead to such horrible outcomes if its goal was to discipline the people?
As I said, many ordinary people became disciplined but the discipline deteriorated in the military simply because they could do almost anything.
As General Almonte also wrote in his memoirs, it took a little over a year to see the true nature of martial law. Almonte wrote: “Once Marcos consolidated his power, he did not use this to build a nation.”
Marcos used Martial Law to set up a new oligarchy consisting of his friends, relatives, the generals and his political allies. He legalized his dictatorship with a new Constitution so that he could stay in power forever.
Sure, he and his wife built a number of hospitals, many bridges and roads that continue to be used to this day. But the leakage due to corruption was horrific.
And the damage done to institutions such as the military took years to repair. He used the soldiers like his private army. He deprofessionalized the military. Part of the reason junior officers rebelled was that there were a lot of overstaying generals so they could not be promoted.
Another question – Did Martial Law bring out a sense of nationalism among Filipinos? Sad to say, many Filipinos – especially the educated ones – could not wait to get out of the country, to flee the country.
Jobs were hard to come by. Pay was low. And there was this sense of fear that one could get picked up, arrested, or simply disappear anytime.
Jokes about the New Society were forbidden. DZMM anchor Ariel Ureta was picked up after he made fun of Marcos’ New Society by saying, sa ikauunlad ng bayan, bisikleta ang kailangan. He should have said – disiplina – but the dictatorship had no sense of humor.
A newspaper cartoonist told me that he was barred from drawing Imelda Marcos with a double chin.
But why worry about Martial Law, which took place decades ago and hasn’t been repeated since?
Well, because someone could try to impose it again.
In fact, someone keeps talking about declaring or not declaring Martial Law nowadays.
Marcos did that too before declaring Martial Law. He kept threatening to declare it long before he actually imposed it.
You must have noticed, on Facebook especially, supporters of Bongbong Marcos and President Rodrigo Duterte actually praising Martial Law and saying it would be good for the country.
Then they point to the many roads, bridges and other infrastructure projects that Marcos was able to build during Martial Law.
They neglect to point out that those roads and bridges were tainted with a stupendous amount of corruption. And behind them was a terrific human cost. Those were Marcos’ showcases to brag to the world how good Martial Law was.
Behind those showcases were a neglected and poverty-stricken people. When Marcos assumed the presidency in 1965, 43.3% of Filipino families lived below the poverty line. By 1980, a year before he lifted Martial Law but it was only a paper lifting, the poverty rate had jumped to 64.1% or six out of every ten Filipino families.
It is the number of poor people, not the number of bridges or kilometers of roads, that is the true gauge of success for any Philippine President. At the end of a presidential term you do not ask how many bridges or roads he built. You ask, how many poor people he was able to lift out of poverty.
Because people are much more important than objects. Please remember that. You and I are more important than any building or railroad or highway.
Which brings me to the question of human rights. Marcos espoused an ideology that said human rights were not appropriate nor important for Third World nations. The same ideology pushed for an authoritarian leadership to steer Third World nations into become First World.
You hear similar sentiments being expressed today. For instance, I’ve seen Duterte supporters say that the poor can’t eat human rights.
Sure, they can’t eat human rights. But they can die for lack of it. Because only human rights guarantee that the state will observe your civil liberties. What are some of these?
The right to complain to government. The right not to be raided in dead of night without a search warrant. The right not to have your possessions seized by the police. The right not to be arrested without an arrest warrant. The right to criticize political leaders. The right to keep silent when questioned by the police or military. The right to be informed on matters of public concern. The right to form unions to push for better pay and working conditions. The right not to have one’s property seized without being paid for it.
You must have heard Duterte supporters say – why does the Commission on Human Rights only criticize policemen. Why do they not criticize drug addicts, traffickers and other criminals?
Because the CHR was precisely set up to be a watchdog of state agents like the police and the soldiers, so that they do not abuse their right to carry firearms and arrest people on behalf of the state.
Increasingly these days, I’ve been asked – can Martial Law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus happen?
Before I answer, let me briefly explain what these two terms mean. The suspension of the writ of habeas corpus simply means that if you get arrested, the police or military can hold you indefinitely – sometimes days, even years, just like what happened to Chancellor Santiago before. Because nothing will compel them to produce your body before a court of law where the judge can ask whether you are being legally or illegally detained.
The term Martial Law has changed meaning ever since Marcos abused it. In the 1935 Constitution, the President could declare Martial Law and suspend the writ – meaning send out the armed forces and arrest people – whenever there was invasion, insurrection, or rebellion or imminent danger of any of these three conditions.
Marcos exploited the term “imminent danger” to declare military rule. Today, the 1987 Constitution no longer carries the phrase “imminent danger”. And bars any President from ever doing what Marcos did – such as close down Congress and bar the Supreme Court from ruling on the legality of the declaration of martial law.
Despite these, can Martial Law and suspension of the writ of habeas corpus still happen?
Of course it can, but only if you let it happen. Only if you don’t protest with all your might.
Tyrants rule when the people are meek and silent.
Marcos’ Martial Law showed that it doesn’t work as a model for development. Because, as the saying goes, absolute power corrupts absolutely.
What you have to watch out for is not just the declaration of Martial Law but also the changing of the 1987 Constitution. When you change from one constitution to another you will need a transition period – a period where the one in charge will have absolute powers.
The question to ask is, during the transition period from presidential to parliamentary-federal, can President Duterte be trusted to use his absolute powers only for the good of the nation? Or will he use it for example to put the Marcoses back in power? I will end my speech on that note.
Thank you.
Sup says
Who is the most likely candidate for President Duterte’s Prime Minister and successor under the parliamentary-federal government being hatched by his administration?
It is former Sen. Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., according to veteran journalist Raissa Robles.
Speaking at a forum at the University of the Philippines School of Economics, Robles, a correspondent for the South China Morning Post and author of the book “Marcos Martial Law: Never Again,” said the son of the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos was the likely choice of Duterte, a “Marcos loyalist and admirer of the strongman.”
ADVERTISEMENT
“Who do you think Duterte’s Prime Minister and successor is likely to be? Most probably Ferdinand ‘Bongbong’ Marcos,” she said on Friday.
Robles cited a remark made by Marcos during the vice presidential debate in April last year, in which he disclosed something that he said Duterte had told him.
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/875244/bongbong-likely-pick-for-prime-minister-in-dutertes-federalism-bid
raissa says
kita noyo na pala.
I will post my entire talk.
Sup says
at 5.54p m 324 comments and counting…
leona says
Nasa Season 1 Episode 3 na tayo. . . today’s arrest of Sen. De Lima.
Para sa S1 E4. . . alleged bribery by an ex-sen and current lawmaker for P100M to witnesses-convicts against Sen. De Lima to retract their testimonies.
Yun S1 episodes 1 & 2. . . kayo na mag hula.
Sampung Episodes kada Season ‘to.
An interesting SEASONS to view in the country.
leona says
From a ‘bird’s eye view’ of the DOJ cases vs Sen. De Lima, why was a warrant of arrest against her very probable?
Was it because she didn’t submit any Counter-Affidavit(s)? Maybe or probably.
Even her action at the Court of Appeals for a TRO was not successful. Why? Same reason. . . no defense evidence on her side could be looked into.
Nothing at all to show what her defense is or was.
What’s the most probable to take place? Hearing & Trial. A tedious and long Season.
A flaw or a flow on her cases.
Barangay Captain says
Dear Raissa and Alan:
Would you be so kind to tell me why my last (rather innocuous) comment was not posted … is still ‘awaiting moderation’ …. after 14 hours, ar so?
Is this the CENSORSHIP that you allude to in the imminent declaration of MLII?
raissa says
Sorry. I was busy finishing my talk today at UP.
Akismet was acting up.
Not censorship.
Mel says
ON ‘pinas’ People Power Anniversary.
Reminiscing rallying chants…
Will he err won’t he Lesign?
Come silent STROKE as luck, than street protests for digong to step down.
Doggone
Sam says
Sorry Folk … out of topic
DILG is calling out people to go to Luneta this coming Friday.. despite of (or maybe for then in lieu of the 31th EDSA celebration)
According to DILG, this is not nor has anything to do with EDSA (they say so… but i think otherwise).
It seems that they didn’t want to respect the occasion, and maybe (hope i may be wrong but i wish i am not) This is a move to uplift DO30, showing the there are people behind him. (but maybe you might also be thinking what i do. remember someone did claimed that reporters were bride of 1 US just to attend a presscon? If they can think of such move, it is most likely that they can do it… diba?)
arc says
I can envisage hakot crowd, busloads of them, na naman. free rides, free lunch and money in envelopes as pabuya are all good incentives to come. money which could have been used to rebuild surigao city being diverted. what is dilg doing for surigao?
vandr says
what are intel funds for?
aberato says
trapo strategy….marcos legacy…ano pa?
martial_law_baby says
Mam Raissa, thank you for doing this. I know it is too much to ask, or perhaps this is already in the works, but I hope you have a campus tour for your book. Make it sana po your advocacy. With the downsizing of the commemoration of the People Power Revolution by this administration, and impending appointment of Bongbong Marcos in the Duterte government, I am worried that the sins of the Marcoses might be forgotten.
netty says
Hi Raissa , finally my friend has found and bought the buckbuster book , Martial law, Never Again.
She had a bit of a hard time looking for it. Every book buying has a story to tell on its own.She said it was the last copy in San Pedro bookstore and the saleslady kept on laughing saying ” ikaw lang pala hinintay ng last copy na ito, ” lol.
After I read it, it’s going to be a gift for my elite friend who is very special to me. Thank you and regards to all the ever energized CPMERS, MORE POWER! Blessings.
arc says
guys, I’ve heard na ang apo ni primitivo mijares is re-launching the book, the conjugal dictatorship of ferdinand and imelda marcos.
the more books there is about the evil of marcos and martial law, the better for us all. we cannot pretend that evil did not happen in our history, that those entrusted to look after our citizens, harmed citizens instead, the nation plundered, law and order ignored.
kalakala says
oot:
1. from pdi dated 20 feb.2017: Pimentel downplays ex-Davao cop’s exposé vs Duterte
2. Aguirre downplays Lascañas’ claim on existence of DDS
By: Tetch Torres-Tupas – Reporter / @T2TupasINQINQUIRER.net / 03:25 PM February 20, 2017
Justice Secretary Vitaliano Aguirre II downplayed the testimony of retired Senior Police Officer 3 (SPO3) Arturo Lascañas on the existence of the Davao Death Squad (DDS) where President Rodrigo Duterte is being tagged as its leader.
“He could be another Matobato as he was presented by [Senator Antonio] Trillanes [IV],” Aguirre said referring to confessed gunman Edgar Matobato who has been criticized for his inconsistent testimonies before the Senate.
Aguirre noted the timing of Lascañas admission in relation to the filing of drug charges against Senator Leila De Lima.
Read more: http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/873317/aguirre-downplays-lascanas-claim-on-existence-of-dds#ixzz4ZDABRQGE
leona says
Mayroon ‘o Wala DDS?
PNP Chief Bato: “Ilang beses na inimbestigahan yung DDS na sinasabi nila. Creation lang yan ng media pero wala talagang tao na nagsabi na may DDS na isang grupo.”
‘Wala talagang tao na nagsabi’ . . .Si Matobato at PNP police officer SPO3 Arthur Lascanas – tao ba sila ‘o hindi? Acc to DOJ Agui’s term. . . maybe these 2 men are ‘not humanity.’
Cop Lascanas earlier denied there is a DDS saying ‘media hype’ lang yun. Who COACHED him to use and say this – MEDIA HYPE YUN?
Proof of existence of DDS maybe can be checked at Securities & Exchange Commission if it is registered! It seems there are now TWO non-humans who says it exists.
So, now TWO NON-HUMANITY will again open Sen. Lacson’s Cmttee.
These TWO non-humanity made extrajudicial confessions [ EJC ] : Matobato earlier and Lascanas recently.
People at large are hungry to know into this.
DDS = deny deny syiempre.
Are testimonies of witnesses, like these TWO non-humanity, being secured correctly and truthfully without bias or partiality?
Hearing, hearing and hearing. . . to prove beyond a reasonable doubt or a substantial probable truth?
raissa says
LOL
arc says
inconvenient truth and the rise of the super humans with super sense at nawalan ng takot. de bale na bad timing, truth comes unbidden.
bingi’t bulag a plenty kasi sina bato, aquirre, pimentel, et al., ang mga ito ay napaka ang vested interests and have most to lose. just because these idiots say dds doesn’t doesn’t mean dds doesn’t exist. they’re looking the other way kasi, kaya hindi makakita.
super humans and the rise of the honorable soldier kanin, nag-iiba ang hagip ng hangin ngayon. the ides of march is coming.
arc says
bad timing sabi, ang pahayay ni lascanyas kuno just when de lima is about to be arrested.
dili yan bad timing, yan baga ay divine intervention.
it’s good na si lascanyas ay nagpakatutuo ngayon. nuon ultra maka-digong siya, ngayon he is for truth and justice. what caused the change in lascanyas? divine intervention, I say. it took the death of two of lascanyas’ relatives before lascanyas saw the evil of his ways. his relatives maybe sangkot sa droga but they were loved and missed by their families. the dead left a void no one can fill.
divine intervention. when god speaks, man listens.
leona says
Sen. De Lima to be arrrested but she challenges DOJ’s filing of the cases with the regular RTC courts on JURISDICTION.
DOJ’s stand is regular courts have ‘EXCLUSIVE’ jurisdiction, citing one case- PP vs Sen. Honasan, SC En Banc 2004.
Who do we think is correct on this JURISDICTION?
R.A. No. 9165 on Drugs Law, Sec. 90 says:
“The Supreme Court shall designate special courts from among the existing Regional Trial Courts in each judicial region to exclusively try and hear cases involving violations of this Act. ”
‘x x x to exclusively try and hear cases xxx
Reading this clause does not categorically say that R.A. No. 9165 puts regular courts with exclusive jurisdiction UNLESS [ acc to Sec. 90] the Supreme Court ‘SAYS SO.’
The Section 90 GIVES the Supreme Court something in Its authority ., . . to ‘DESIGNATE’ – “special courts” [ there are no special courts today ].
But saying or believing that regular courts have ‘exclusive’ jurisdiction on Drugs cases is not totally clear because the law [Sec. 90 ] did NOT use the word ‘JURISDICTION’ but used ‘to x x x TRY and HEAR cases’ . . . per Supreme Court power of DESIGNATION to [special] courts.
If the above is one correct interpretation then Sen. De Lima’s contention is right in that being senator, elected public official, the CASES filed should have been with the Sandiganbayan court as worked upon by the Ombudsman Office, with this Office’s function to approve, investigate and file charges against public officials.
If it is the other way around that DOJ’s contention is the correct one, how does such interpretation continue to be correct under the clause ‘The Supreme Court shall designate xxx’ which ordinarily is a power to SHIFT per ‘designation’ in what court or courts Drugs cases can be filed?
Sec, 90 of the law looks or appears dependent upon the Supreme Court ‘designation’ power. Thus it cannot be always believed that regular court [ RTCs ] have exclusive jurisdiction on Drugs cases.
I would initially called SEC. 90 clause as the ‘dependent designation power’ of the Supreme Court for Drugs cases and without casting aside the ‘all public officials and employees’ liability to be with the Sandiganbayan court jurisdiction. Provisions of law and jurisprudence supports this view also as opposed to the DOJ’s claim.
The case of Sen. Honasan in 2004 is not on all fours with this cases against Sen. De Lima in 2017. The former was for coup ‘de tat’ while the latter is for violation of the Drugs law.
I am inclined to believe that regular courts do not have exclusive jurisdiction on Drugs cases in view of SEC. 90 of R.A. No. 9165 clause. My opn.
leona says
Just to add to clarify . . . in the Sen. Honasan case, the SC did discuss the jurisdiction issue of the SANDIGANBAYAN COURT and the Ombudsman Office. It said:
“The reason for the creation of the Ombudsman in the 1987 Constitution and for the grant to it of broad investigative authority, is to insulate said office from the long tentacles of officialdom that are able to penetrate judges’ and fiscals’ offices, and others involved in the prosecution of erring public officials, and through the exertion of official pressure and influence, quash, delay, or dismiss investigations into malfeasances and misfeasances committed by public officers. It was deemed necessary, therefore, to create a special office to investigate all criminal complaints against public officers regardless of whether or not the acts or omissions complained of are related to or arise from the performance of the duties of their office. The Ombudsman Act makes perfectly clear that the jurisdiction of the Ombudsman encompasses “all kinds of malfeasance, misfeasance, and non-feasance that have been committed by any officer or employee as mentioned in Section 13 hereof, during his tenure of office” (Sec. 16, R.A. 6770).”
. . . ‘to insulate said office from the long tentacles of officialdom that are able to penetrate judges’ and fiscals’ offices, and others involved in the prosecution of erring public officials x x x’
To ‘Insulate from the long tentacles of officialdom.’ I get this to mean that there be no abuse of power. What to insulate?
From ‘penetrating fiscals’ and judges offices through exertion of pressure and influence’.
Does Sen. De Lima have proof that the fiscals or prosecutors of DOJ were penetrated with exertion of pressure and influence to file the cases against her? In short, is she being persecuted or prosecuted under the circumstances of her being a senator and critic of the Administration?
Some senators on her side says ‘ILLEGAL’ ang filing with the regular courts, etc.
Is persecution illegal? Definitely. But is she being persecuted?
Her proofs will tell the public at large and before the courts, regular courts or at Sandiganbayan, etc.
leona says
Link of the Honasan case
http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2004/apr2004/gr_159747_2004.html
leona says
Link of R.A. No. 9165
http://www.lawphil.net/statutes/repacts/ra2002/ra_9165_2002.html
arc says
return to sender, thank you but no thanks. yan dapat ang sagot ng rtc raffled to handle de lima’s case. not in this court, wigged one, go to the ombudsman and have your showdown there. surely, the wigged one is not afraid of the ombudsman.
prosecuting a martyr as de lima is going to the death knell of the regional trial court, supplanting and usurping a case the ombudsman is best able to handle.
when pressed by the wigged one, rtc should have the right to say no, and rightly so, else such court will go down in history as the infamously conniving court penetrated by the wigged one, nagpagapos sa tentacles ng wigged one.
rtc should re-direct the wigged one. go to the ombudsman, sir mister fake wig, the ombudsman is the right venue for this type of caso.
highfive says
@leona
“The case of Sen. Honasan in 2004 is not on all fours with this cases against Sen. De Lima in 2017. The former was for coup ‘de tat’ while the latter is for violation of the Drugs law”.
I think it is more appropriate to say “the latter is allegedly for violation of Drugs Law”. Since the case against has not been clearly established even though it’s been repeatedly heard in the Senate, hence Sen Delima should be presumed that she hasn’t violated anything yet.
highfive says
The retired Davao cop is basically reporting about the alleged crimes that happened in Davao. It’s in the best interest of the people to know the truth or the falsehood about it. It seems that several officials are downplaying it. Isn’t it the Senate or other government investigation agencies that are tasked to investigate crimes are suppose to carry out a formal inquiry to find out the facts of the allegation so as to establish the falsity or truth? I don’t see anything wrong with investigating crimes because every measure taken to stop crime keeps all the people safe.
vandr says
the senate w/ dick as head have already dumped the first salvo.
now, the senate pres himself is down-playing the second even it hasn’t started yet.
can we still expect our senate to be the caretaker of our democracy?
people need to watch the zarzuela they are into.
the house also became the escape route of some rogue politicians. not to mention as chamber of some plunderers.
arc says
dick gordon has much to fear, the truth will undo him. he got his job kasi (senate’s justice chair) on false claims and premises, and now, dick has to defend all falsehood and suppress all truths.
a smart man would have epiphany but not dick. apparently, he’s lacking in vision and not that smart too. if he’s not careful, he’ll lose the chair, the way de lima was made to lose the chair.
vandr says
kunwari lang ayaw ni dick ng chairmanship.
ngayon ayaw nang mawala ang makatas na komite.
hehehe.
lick d dick..
arc says
the retired cop has spoken. I am hoping that next to speak will be vacc’s sandra cam. volunteers against crime and corruption cannot stay quiet now that ex cop lascanyas is veering towards the truth.
else, many will think vacc stands for volunteers abetting crime and corruption, or volunteers in aid of crime and corruption. speak now, sandra cam, before history consigns you to infamy. your family and the generations that will come after them will be dragged along with your false claims and bravado. their future and reputation smeared by the mistakes you’ve made. correct your mistakes before divine justice takes its toll.
leona says
Sen. Gordon’s refusal to OPEN investigation on cop LASCANAS’ new revelation is HE LIED before under OATH. Now, no more!
Lying is a situation that cannot be remedied by telling the TRUTH. . . Gordon’s principle.
Many people lied before . . . before telling the truth. . . under oath. Truth is bitter to hear.
Let us HEAR truth and lying to find truth and lying. What’s the alternative? Don’t hear anything!
Iron-clad rule is Sen. Gordon on truth & lying. Sen. Lacson’s view is much and much better. Kudos to him.
Life is full of truths & lies.
arc says
dicky boy can’t handle the truth. guess, we’ll just have to shove him, overruled!
lascanyas is not the 1st to lie under oath, dicky boy should know that. truth is always welcome no matter how inconvenient and protracted.
follow the evidence, know the fact. hopefully, after lascanyas, others will come forward and tell the truth about the existence of digong’s death squad.
jun pala will be remembered, he did not die for nothing. magsisindi ako ng kandila para sa kanya, may his soul rest in peace.
I’ll also pray that digong’s mother will reach out from the grave and intercede so that her woefully erring son will be put on the straight and narrow.
many of us have been praying for miracle, and then, lumuntad si lascanyas. thank you, lord.
leona says
@arc. . . the ‘OTHERS’ of the DDS are probably THINKING now “Are we SAFE ‘n SOUND’?
. . . probably ‘No, my dear Boys. The thought of eliminating you Boys is better. DDS = Dead na dead syiempre!
Safe ‘n Sound = SnS. Dead witnesses tell no good tales.
arc says
sorry po, I have to say na kung pareho sila sa atoa and the same stage of life, safety ang siyang foremost sa isip also perpetuation of the specie. but if you’re a killer and lives with death, somehow death lost its mystery and becomes a passage to the next door.
dead men walking with nothing more to lose. men are inherently born good, though in life they change path, but towards the end, men return to the fold and start to think about what legacy to leave behind. part of life yata yan to make peace and unburden themselves before meeting the maker.
integrity vs despair, (psychosocial theory ni erikson) a time when older adults come to view their past lives and what they have done in the past ‘as meaningful’ in order to face death without much worries and regrets.
duquemarino says
What we fear is always with us. Bato-bato sa langit, ang tamaan galit na galit.
Galit sa katotohanan.
vandr says
“galit sa katotohanan”
masdan ang galit niya kay de5.
arc says
bad timing, aquirre should also blame god for bad timing. nilindol ang surigao just when npa is getting active na naman and killing soldiers here, there and everywhere.
bad timing na nagiba ang mga infrastructures sa surigao just when money is scarce and harder to find; worse, bumaba ng maigi ang halaga ng peso contra dolyar. the money spent on asean meeting would be off better used to rebuild surigao. dapat austere ang asean meeting at hindi yong no expense barred.
leona says
Martial Law as power corrupts absolutely
A. Is our President cruel to his own people because of the drug problem that Martial Law is needed to curb the problem?
1. Lower House of Congress wants to pass the bill on Death penalty.
2. Extra-judicial killing [EJK] is already in place.
3. Mix Martial Law with EJK will be ruthless. More than cruel.
Looking at the photo [thanks to @Nelson Agoyaoy] these young students will be future victims of Martial Law mixed with killing. Cruel? It will be ruthlessly cruel.
Why is that? The answer is because it will be a ruthless license by agents of the State to kill people. Cruel license.
B. Compare, by imagination to come to reality, the Marcos Martial Law with a 2017 Martial Law.
1. About 3,000+ dead, many injured and hundreds if not thousand missing under Marcos Martial Law.
2. At 2017 about 7,000 already dead because of EJK. No Martial Law yet. These dead are alleged drug users or drug addicts. These dead were killed by some State agents – PNP cops. Some say by others.
C. Will a 2017 Martial Law curb the problem of drug users or drug addicts? Illegal drugs using, etc. is a crime.
1. Is it possible, under all forms of belief or imagination, that this crime can be stopped?
2. What about ‘Other crimes’ under a 2017 Martial Law? Will such ‘other crimes’ be part of the killing by the State agents, legally or non-legally?
700 Students attending the Convocation on Marcos Martial Law will be 7,000 future victims. It will be 70,000 future dead victims. For 6 years, without God’s will, it will be 700,000 killings, more by EJK.
Where will it be cruel? Ruthless? In every dead person under a 2017 Martial Law.
In 1939, in Germany, Adolf Hitler planned to kill all Jews and other ‘pests’ he wanted to. It stopped in 1945. That is about 6 years time. More than 6 Million Jews and OTHERS were killed by Germany’s State agents.
Our President will have a term of 6 years. Imagine if 6 Million Filipinos are killed in 6 years time. Cruel? Ruthless?
Are we into another HOLOCAUST – a mass killing to start this 2017?
Is the count of 7,000+ killed already cruel? Ruthless? If Marcos was able to lived as leader after 1986 for another 4 years, would it have been 7,000 counted dead?
Is there any time dictators or tyrants stop thinking of killing his own people? With or without Martial Law?
Can tyrants be stopped with all the might, that is by actions? Can the people be still meek and silent towards tyrants?
Martial Law will invite fighting with the people. A drug problem is not and will not be a justifiable reason to have a death penalty law. It will always be UNJUSTIFIED.
Leaders of government should not and never become emotional to resort to the UNTHINKABLE – cruelty or ruthlessness to his own people.
Let us pray and hope that they never will do taking human life under our own such circumstances.
Fight against Martial Law. Fight EJK. These are evil consequences of corruption.
Barangay Captain says
Peyote and the Old Testament. Deadly mix.
Good luck with that.
manilamac says
Fine use of a *very* bully pulpit. Kudos, Raissa. You are a true protector of the public welfare in the finest of journalistic tradition. More power to you!
Kamote Procopio says
Bravo ma’am Raissa 👏.
I am a UE alumni and was proud that you gave such a speech answered those questions.
I really hope the other universities start sending you an invite as well.
raissa says
Thanks.
arc says
ay, ang mga anak ni digong ay may kanya-kanyang issues. si baste kuno is crazy about ellen adarna, kung saan si ellen, nakabuntot si baste. at yong anak kuno ni baste (apo ni digong) ay bihirang bihira masulyapan ang ama. panay sa ina na lang daw. medyo luho ng droga ang mga anak ni digong. they probly are not politically inclined and are only prop up by their father. and once their father is dead, they’ll probly scurry and hide. at the moment davao is getting messier. sara got phantom pregnancy with triplets. seems like her minds is flighty as her father’s.
maybe, digong is looking out for his grandkids and making pack with the marcoses on the condition that on his death, the marcoses will be kind to grandkids, initiate and mentor them deeper into politics. at yong mga ka-frats ni digong, they’ll squabble over the remains of the day and may even rob digong’s family on his death bed.
arc says
quasi hitler, quasi marcos, that’s digong. we should not change our constitution under digong’s watch. he’ll only muddle all.
arc says
digong should concentrate on rebuilding surigao soonest and prove to all that he is nation builder, not nation demolisher.
rOSARIO says
I have been the mayor of davao for 23 years. Was once a congressman. Now, the president. My daughter is the present mayor and my son is the vice mayor of davao respectively. Why on earth, I’m going to put bbm to be my successor, when I can have my children do better for our political dynasty? I do not even want anyone to run davao. And now that I am running the whole country, you think that I am just going to hand it over to another family? I have all my family and friends and frat brothers and sisters with me! PI!
The unsaid thought…
vandr says
he’s a fanatic of the waxman.
he’s bent to install bobong into power.
Rolly says
Who knows what’s in Duterte’s mind, what obligations he entered with the Marcoses?
Duterte once said while visiting China, that by January 2017, the Philippines may have a new vice president. Thus, he is gearing up the Dayunyor to be his successor.