MERGED: All About Gloria Arroyo - Past, Present, Future

[monroy]

what Aquino's administration did was cruelty. this is purely personal attacks. pa choy choy lang na si abnoy. tapulan daku. abnormal. admin should let DOJ lawyers re-enroll on their law subjects. hahahaha!

I think thats fair bro.. but some SC justices also need to re-enroll in beginner's English, or get a dictionary.

Meaning of final:

a : not to be altered or undone <all sales are final> b : of or relating to a concluding court action or proceeding <final decree>
2
: coming at the end : being the last in a series, process, or progress <the final chapter>
3
: of or relating to the ultimate purpose or result of a process <our final goal>

[AlbertCruz]

I'll quote Neal Cruz as my response:

"Sure the Constitution guarantees a person’s right to travel, but all rights have their limits, as when they collide with the rights of others. Freedom of the press is limited by the law on libel, freedom of speech is limited by the law on slander, the freedom of workers to strike is limited by other labor laws, the freedom to gather and seek redress for grievances is limited by many other laws.

Likewise, the freedom to travel is not absolute. It is limited by the right of the government and the people to seek justice. Of all the rights, I think the right to justice is the most important. Why should a person’s right to travel be more important than a whole nation’s right to justice? Travel is supposed to be taken at one’s leisure. Are a person’s leisure and pleasure more important than justice?"

You can't claim Constitutional rights to travel have been trampled on when they (SC) haven't even ruled on a constitutional issue regarding this in Arroyo's case. All they've done is issue a TRO, it's not a ruling but a TRO.. huge difference...

That is assuming she is already guilty. All the thing they can pin her on is Electoral Sabotage. And that won't hold. Asa naman tung mga plunder cases and etc.? Naa ra man sa Media tanang evidence sa mga "kinawat" kunuhay. Its almost two years already. And its now just two normal years, its two years of constantly finding evidences and yet la gihapun. I'm not saying she is clean but anyone who just points fingers without proof is also questionable.

[amingb]

But we're not talking about the SC correcting its mistakes. Rather we're talking about the SC interpreting a plain and simple word "final" in a way that no other court system in the world has done. Cite an instance of the US SC interpreting a word to mean the complete opposite of what its plain meaning is, and I'll concede that ground to you. The American people respect the US SC because it is an efficient and honest body that rules swiftly and with utmost respect for their own rules and the law of the land.

You will never hear about a US SC justice engaging in plagiarism, nor will you see flipping jurisprudence more than once in a decade. Because of this, they have a stable justice system and strong rule of law. More importantly, there is finality and therefore complete resolution of cases before them. This is important, because if a "final" decision can be retracted then nobody who goes to court can ever be sure if they have really won the case and this leads to anarchy as people lose faith in the courts and resort to other more violent means to resolve disputes.

Why do you think there is so much extrajudicial killings in this country? It's because the policemen, sick and tired of seeing criminals walk free and cases drag on for years, are fed up with the system.

The SC doesn't have its own police or army so its only authority comes from moral authority, which is founded on integrity. Without moral foundation, the SC doesn't have any power and its orders become meaningless. The quickest way to destroy your moral authority is by engaging in hypocrisy, if you can't follow your own rules how can you expect others to follow them?

Can the Supreme Court Change Its Mind? - Op-Ed - NYTimes.com

I Think Bro kanang issue is one good example of the Cityhood reversal from unconstitutional to constitutional .. mao na gi issue sa Pnoy Admin as bad precedent .. but the IBP support the reversal of the SC ug katong mga Legal Expert ....

[masakiton]

No case, so there's no reason to hold departure. i don't think the SC will be biased enough to issue a TRO on baseless grounds. it's simple. if you don't file a case against someone you accuse of wrong doing, he/she goes free. and why no case is being filed? insufficient evidence.

dakong sakto
ang current admin puros raman gud pasangil ug publicity ...
based sa SONA.. daghan man kaha sila (current admin) information sa corruption activities ni gloria.. more than 1 year na.. pirting nihita sa gi file nga kaso

[monroy]

That is assuming she is already guilty. All the thing they can pin her on is Electoral Sabotage. And that won't hold. Asa naman tung mga plunder cases and etc.? Naa ra man sa Media tanang evidence sa mga "kinawat" kunuhay. Its almost two years already. And its now just two normal years, its two years of constantly finding evidences and yet la gihapun. I'm not saying she is clean but anyone who just points fingers without proof is also questionable.

It hasn't been two years since they issued a WLO though. Big difference. And nobody is presuming she is guilty. If that were the case, she'd already be in jail without a conviction in the courts.

All that's being restricted is her freedom to leave the country. She is free to travel anywhere within the Philippines, she isn't in jail, she isn't even under house arrest. You probably didn't know that a lot of people are on a stop departure watch list who aren't even criminals or suspects. DOST scholars and other scholars who benefit from scholarship programs of government, for example, can't leave the country unless they pay back all of the tuition. But you don't see the SC rushing to issue them TROs so they can leave the country because their "freedom" is being restricted do you?

Now if your argument was that there should be a limit to how long a person can remain on a WLO without a case being filed in court, then I agree with you. But how long has Arroyo been on the WLO? Do you even know?

[tylerdurden]

sus na unsa,para ma atiman na ang kahimtang sa panglawas ni GMA, pro maski pa ug guilty na sila kung wala pay kaso naka file pwde d i nimo na sila babagan? now ang pangutana? sa kadugay na nila sa pwesto ngano hantud karon wala man gihapon sila naka file sa case? unsa man ang nadugayan? remeber ka during elelction? unsa g sulti ni noynoy?

i love your reply man. I LOVE IT! i knew one of you ass-kissers was gonna answer with this 'default' GMA-statement and was hoping you would...

so...

#1. 'ma atiman na ang kahimtang sa panglawas' - just what condition do they have? is it really something that cannot be treated here? why are they not getting an impartial medical practitioner to vouch for their need of medical treatment abroad? if they really distrust the medical workers in the country, why are they not saying so and pushing this issue more? they want to imply that it is a serious health matter but that's about as far as they go. they don't specifically say what's what. why is that?

#2. 'babagan' - because of justice. this isn't a simple case of 'i bumped your car, i'm sorry let's let the insurance companies settle it' matter. this is a matter of theft on the largest scale, stealing from a country. argue as we might that it's been done before but consider that things aren't the same as they used to be. what's different?

1. the arroyo's did it blatantly and excessively.

2. the current administration has the will to prosecute.

#3 'file sa case' - there are many possible reasons and, as a non-legal practitioner, i couldn't say completely but i can take some educated guesses.

1. firming up the case. so many cases have been blown to bits because of technical irregularities.

2. searching for reliable sources. somewhat links to #1 but needs its own mention.

the arroyo's have stepped on a lot of toes - A LOT OF TOES. even former friends are now against. however, not all of these people can be reliably used for prosecuting them because some of them are not very 'legally squeaky clean'.

on the opposite side of that coin, the arroyos are rich and powerful. any Filipino you ask knows that you don't go up against someone rich and powerful on a whim. you have to weigh the pros and cons of that. e.g., yes you might be prosecuting a corrupt president but she might have you killed next week. they can also buy you out.

3. building the cases. truckloads of evidence probably means a ton of cases to file. i kind of think it works like a shotgun - the more cases you file, the higher the chance of getting them convicted. these people are so rich and powerful that they have a good chance of squeaking past a lot of cases. so, to reduce their chances of getting away scot-free, file as many cases as possible.

[AlbertCruz]

It hasn't been two years since they issued a WLO though. Big difference. And nobody is presuming she is guilty. If that were the case, she'd already be in jail without a conviction in the courts.

All that's being restricted is her freedom to leave the country. She is free to travel anywhere within the Philippines, she isn't in jail, she isn't even under house arrest. You probably didn't know that a lot of people are on a stop departure watch list who aren't even criminals or suspects. DOST scholars and other scholars who benefit from scholarship programs of government, for example, can't leave the country unless they pay back all of the tuition. But you don't see the SC rushing to issue them TROs so they can leave the country because their "freedom" is being restricted do you?

Now if your argument was that there should be a limit to how long a person can remain on a WLO without a case being filed in court, then I agree with you. But how long has Arroyo been on the WLO? Do you even know?

so if was some one person rather then Arroyo, can you still say the same about the situation?

[tylerdurden]

again, stop with the teleserye logic. dili na sila kontra-bida na magdrama-drama para maka.ekyas. with all their resources, if ganahan jyud sila mawala dugay na unta na silang nawala.

teleserye logic? really. i knew i was going to have fun with you.

yeah sure, they could've gotten away considering their resources. but they don't want to just get away. they want to get away with their resources intact. they can't do that by going to exile.

what else you got?

[tylerdurden]

what Aquino's administration did was cruelty. this is purely personal attacks. pa choy choy lang na si abnoy. tapulan daku. abnormal. admin should let DOJ lawyers re-enroll on their law subjects. hahahaha!

oh boy, you're going to bring out the 'cruelty' card, huh? isn't that a little ironic considering who you are defending?

[tylerdurden]

No case, so there's no reason to hold departure. i don't think the SC will be biased enough to issue a TRO on baseless grounds. it's simple. if you don't file a case against someone you accuse of wrong doing, he/she goes free. and why no case is being filed? insufficient evidence.

you don't think the SC will be biased enough? good luck with that!