vonjobi: wow, congratulations! kelan ang trip? i hope i'll be around when you come. had a good time with diosa last...
Keith Bacongco: Knowing Nograles and his Big Boss...garapalan na lang talaga.
Vinia Datinguinoo Mukherjee: Congratulations, PCIJ! Mabuhay kayo!
Lead Philippines: But without credible mass media there, what is left to protect the people..?
vonjobi: it's juned sOniDo.

Latest Message 5 months ago

hopeless_race : Lets not just focus sa mga malversation of funds, sa mga overpricing..ating pagtuunan ng atensyon ang diskarte ng mga politiko na umuutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno."Small time" ang ibang pamamaraan ng pangungurakot kumpara sa pag-utang sa gobyerno ng bilyon na tunay ngang masasabing "pinaka big-time" at wala pang sabit.
hopeless_race : Mukhang tikom ang bibig ng lahat pagdating sa diskarte ng mga politiko sa pagutang ng mga bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno na tinatakbuhan. Itong pamamaraan na ito ang tunay na kumakain ng malaking porsyento ng ating national budget batay na din sa sinasabi ng world bank.
hopeless_race : Pakisilip naman po ang mga utang ni Villar sa BSP, ang mga utang nila RAMON JACINTO, RONNIE ZAMORA, JOE DE VENECIA at madami pang ibang mga pulitiko. Iilan lamang yan sa mga nababanggit sa balita na may mga malalaking utang sa gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Nagmimistulang "small time" lamang ang malversation of funds kumpara sa laki ng kinakamal ng mga umuutang sa gobyerno. At ito ay malinaw na natatakbuhan dahil hindi nga naman pwede makulong ang may-ari ng kumpanya sa pagkaka-utang lamang. Tunay na mga tuso at magagaling sa batas itong mga politiko natin. Masasabi ko na malamang lahat ng mga politiko ganito ang diskarte...wala pang kulong.
hopeless_race : PCIJ pkitingnan naman po ang mga gaya ni Villar na my malaking utang sa Gobyerno pero tinatakbuhan. Magtatayo ng kumpanya at uutang ng bilyon bilyon sa gobyerno ng walang balak bayaran. Tunay ngang walang nakukulong sa utang...ito ang prinsipyo ginagamit ng mga politiko ntin kaya nakakapagtaka kung san napupunta ang daang bilyong pera ng gobyerno.
hopeless_race : Sana itreat naman po ng media ang hacienda luisita at mendiola massacre na parang MAGUINADANAO MASSACRE. Ipublicized ang mga katotohanan at ipakita sa tao ang karumaldumal na pinaggagawa sa mga farmers dun. Untouchable po ba sila cory at danding at hindi magawang batikusin ng media about these two massacres?
hopeless_race : Kapag napaguusapan ang mendiola at hacienda luisita massacre ay parang walang nangyari at parang hindi big deal. Anu po ba ang pinagkaiba ng dalawang nabanggit na massacre sa maguindanao massacre?
hopeless_race : Its sad that we pinoys are blind to the fact of what had happened in mendiola and hacienda luisita. Ang tanong..bakit ang media ay hindi manlang matackle ang ganitong usapin? Takot ba sila kay cory at danding?
hopeless_race : Wilkins" brand, for P1.4 billion.-1999 Sugarland Multi-Food Corp. for P2.9 billion 2001- Purefoods Corp P7 billion P60 billion Coca-Cola ... See More 2002- Cosmos Bottling Corp. from RFM Corp. for P14.1 billion October 2008- GSIS' shares in Meralco worth PHP30 Billion. December 2008- country's biggest oil refiner, Petron Corporation. international company shopping spree: Australian boutique brewer J. Boag and Son for A$96 million in 2000. $97 million for Thai Amarit Brewery Ltd $35.5 mi
hopeless_race : Gud am..glad to be back.
jr_lad : rip mr. alecks pabico. you'll be greatly missed!
sevens21 : Dati input mo lng name at SSS ID makukuha mo agad STATIC INFO...
sevens21 : tawag ka sa HOTLINE nila walang ANSWER grrr we need pa namn ng static info SSS Gising!!!
sevens21 : Gawa naman po kayo ng article about SSS. Pangit ng site nila dali ma blocked ng account
guest_899 : we must check the background of each potential candidates to avoid having another big mistake like GMA
guest_899 : congratulations to PCIJ, more power and God Bless !
jazzymuver : how did Arroyo swallow that kind of things!! how come that she just spend the money our countrymen for her own sake!!
guest_3664 : i would be glad if u can include the investigation of the manner public officials announce infra projects as per COA regulation. It is frustrating to see their faces on the tarpaulin instead of the prescribed information like name of project, date of implementation,amount of contract, source/s of fund, among other things. This is very rampant here in Marikina. Thanks and more power on your noble endeavors. We need people like you to have make our country great again.
jhanz_08 : im making research on R.A 9136...with rgards to the privatization of NPC..could someone out there can let me understand more bout this matter?why was monopoly dismantled?email me..jhanycem@yahoo.com...thanks much
erika marie : P.S.:) my paper is due next week and i do hope someone could provide me these reports coming from reliable resources thank you ulit.
erika marie : P.S.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study regarding political killings in the philippines. could someone out there please send me human rights reports under Aquino and Ramos administration. you could send it at my email: erikamariet@yahoo.com your response would surely be very much appreciated. thank you everyone. god bless.
guest_4275 : i am currently doing a study for my paper regarding political killings in the philippines. i noted that there are no human rights reports during the Aquino and Ramos administration. could someone out there please send me reports regarding these matter? i do hope these reports came from reliable resources you could send it in my email; erikamariet@yahoo.comyour response would surely be appreciated. thanks everyone. god bless.
jayson bourne : gusto ko po maging member ng PCIJ, panu po ba? may application po ba? sana mapadalhan nyo ako ng info sa email ko... www.jboxpenshoppe@yahoo.com
jayson bourne : cory is OK, but kris & Noynoy sensationalize masyado...
guest_9891 : LABAN pa rin!
meow : boycotts worked during marcos years. how about doing it now against the businesses of the con-ass congressmen?
meow : aside from 168, what other establishments can we boycott that belong to the arroyos and their cronies?
Jalenack : Your shoutbox is blank. Add a message!

You must be a registered user to participate in this chat

Impeachment case brought to SC

Posted by: Avigail Olarte | November 7, 2007 at 5:25 pm
Filed under: Arroyo Impeachment, Congress Watch, Governance, In the News

WITH the rejection of the two impeachment complaints against President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, the legal battle now shifts to the Supreme Court.

Lawyer Harry Roque Jr., whose group led the filing of an 11-page supplemental complaint last Monday, said they will be submitting a petition before the High Court for the “illegal and unconstitutional act” of House of Representatives Secretary General Roberto Nazareno and to clarify, once and for all, the issue of when one is barred from filing an impeachment complaint following the one-complaint-per-year rule.

The Roque and Butuyan Law Offices, the same group that filed an amended impeachment complaint against Arroyo in 2005, said Nazareno acted in grave abuse of discretion when he returned the Roque complaint, saying that it could not be treated as a supplement to the impeachment complaint filed by Iloilo Vice Governor Rolex Suplico against former elections commissioner Benjamin Abalos Sr.

Nazareno said that since the Roque complaint included Arroyo as a new party to the case, it was clearly a separate complaint and therefore required an endorsement from a House member. And besides, Nazareno added, the Suplico complaint was already moot and academic since Abalos is no longer in office. Roque however said that Abalos has not really resigned and is in fact only on terminal leave. And even if, assuming, he has resigned, the impeachment complaint is still valid since the constitutional provision on impeachment not only requires one’s removal from office, it also disqualifies one from holding any public office.

“It is not his job to determine the sufficiency in form and substance of an impeachment complaint. It is the job of the House Committee on Justice to do so,” the group argued. “It is ministerial on his part to transmit the documents to the Committee and not to determine whether the complaint satisfies the constitutional requirements.”

But the “root of all our woes,” Roque said, is the issue on impeachment proceedings. “Our contention is that what the Constitution prohibits is not the filing of multiple complaints, but the conduct of multiple proceedings. Multiple complaints may be filed while a single proceeding is being undertaken.”

The House members are debating on the issue of whether an amended or supplemental complaint to the earlier case filed by lawyer Roel Pulido, perceived to be a weak one, could be accepted. Arroyo allies maintain that an impeachment process is deemed initiated once a complaint has already been referred to the Justice Committee, as stated in the Supreme Court ruling on a case involving then Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr.

“What we have now is a bastardized impeachment process; it has become a rat race of who files first, which is certainly not the intent of the Constitution,” the group said.

Roque’s group in 2005 filed before the Supreme Court a similar petition with Rep. Clavel Martinez as lead petitioner, which sought to nullify the House plenary decision to junk all three impeachment complaints against the President. During that time, the House voted to bar the amended complaint, which sought to supersede the defective Oliver Lozano complaint. Administration allies dismissed the amended version on the basis of the one-year rule. (Read related posts here and here.)

The Supreme Court has yet to decide on the Martinez case despite a petition from the Roque and Butuyan Law Offices in July 2006 for an urgent decision. Roque said they will be consolidating this pending case with the new petition to be filed next week.

In a Philippine Star article, House Minority Floor Leader Ronaldo Zamora said his group will also be submitting a new petition next week to force a decision on the Martinez case, in order to settle the issue when an impeachment process is deemed initiated.

“It’s a very restrictive ruling that House always invokes in blunting serious impeachment efforts,” Zamora said, referring to the one-year rule. “That is the root of the problem. Under this ruling even a toilet paper can serve as an impeachment complaint, and when referred to the committee on justice, can initiate an impeachment process and provide an impeachable officer a one-year protection from impeachment.”

Meanwhile, United Opposition spokesperson Adel Tamano will be filing a Motion for Reconsideration first with the Committee on Justice before filing a petition before the Supreme Court.

The justice committee returned the supplemental complaint filed by UNO because it was improperly filed. Under House Rules, a “verified complaint…shall be filed with the Secretary General.” Tamano filed the complaint with the committee last Monday.

Tamano however said that while the Rules is clear on filing a “verified complaint,” it does not mention any guideline on supplemental complaints. “I did not file a verified complaint so they have no legal basis to reject it.”

Should the committee deny his motion, Tamano said he will then file for a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court for grave abuse of discretion.

The Committee on Justice will be starting its deliberations on the Pulido complaint Monday next week.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, November 7th, 2007 and is filed under Arroyo Impeachment, Congress Watch, Governance, In the News. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

2 people have left comments

the opposition made a mistake… when they filed the supplemental impeachment complaint, their accusations are things that happened after the pulido complaint was filed. logic would dictate that this is a new complaint, barred by the one year rule for impeachment cases. the complainants based their arguments on the rules of court. but guess what, this is not a judicial proceeding. they should have included things that pulido could have included but failed to do so. now that would be a supplemental complaint… what a bunch of losers.

goimon wrote on November 7, 2007 - 7:35 pm | Visit Link

[...] then, it may be that the absence of teeth is due to the Supreme Court, as the PCIJ reports here: Impeachment case brought to SC. digg_url=’http://www.inquirerbloggers.net/current/2007/11/12/house-den tists-reject-dentures/’; [...]

Current » House dentists reject dentures wrote on November 12, 2007 - 8:56 am | Visit Link