OPINION on Government links to WORLD BANK issues!!!

[godwhacker]

Maybe you should at least read all of its content of what he has to say about hearsay.

I have read it all but the problem with the writer is that he is convulating the word hearsay. Sayon ra man unta sabton ang word nga hearsay. Even the dictionary has a very simple meaning about hearsay -one that is based on rumours. And what is a rumour? Sa akong simpleng panabot, istorya lang sa dungog dungog ug way igong ibedensya. Between Sison and Enrile I would agree with Enrile and between Miriam and Sison, I would also agree with Miriam saying that these allegations without enough backing of hard evidence would just be hearsay. Ako di man ko abogado pero mosulti na gani ang mga abugado ug ingon ana motoo ko kay di man sad na bogu mga abugaduha si Enrile ug si Miriam ba.

[bobbyb]

Kuhaon na unta ni Lord si First Gentleman. Gikapoy na inatawn na siya sa mga pamasangil batok niya. Gikapoy nana siya ug tago sa iyang tracks. Gikapoy nana siya ug pangawat. Luoy na kaayo na siya. Anggay na siya mopahuway sa dayon.

[omar50071]

I have read it all but the problem with the writer is that he is convulating the word hearsay. Sayon ra man unta sabton ang word nga hearsay. Even the dictionary has a very simple meaning about hearsay -one that is based on rumours. And what is a rumour? Sa akong simpleng panabot, istorya lang sa dungog dungog ug way igong ibedensya. Between Sison and Enrile I would agree with Enrile and between Miriam and Sison, I would also agree with Miriam saying that these allegations without enough backing of hard evidence would just be hearsay. Ako di man ko abogado pero mosulti na gani ang mga abugado ug ingon ana motoo ko kay di man sad na bogu mga abugaduha si Enrile ug si Miriam ba.

The report did not came out from thin air, in fact WB had done some studies to come up with such a report. And besides, the report itself is not the evidence.

"the evidence is not the WB Report itself but the overwhelming number of witnesses and piles of documents cited in the report. In the “record of interviews” it is quite clear that most of the witnesses’ testimonies are not hearsay although there are also portions which are hearsay."

"Examples are the testimonies of two ex-government officials with personal knowledge of the DPWH bid process who requested that their identity remain confidential and thus have been simply named as CW 1 and CW 2. CW 1 stated that the primary arrangers or facilitators of the collusion included a contractor Eduardo de Luna (who)…was masterminding bids, is close to Mike Arroyo (husband of President GMA) and is a go-between for Mr. Arroyo on foreign assisted projects”. Obviously this is not hearsay. CW 2 on the other hand stated “contractors have told him that politicians, district engineers, BAC members, losing bidders and media are paid under the SOP”. Clearly this is hearsay. Another witness interviewed, who identified himself as Mr. Shingo Nakamura, Vice President of Yoshida Construction Co. stated that “E.C. de Luna was Mike Arroyo’s man. He traveled with Mr. Arroyo, the President and Tito Miranda to Japan. E.C. de Luna organized a syndicate to control the awards of contracts. Miranda is involved as intermediary of Senator Barbers. He even specified the percentage of payments made to the different officials. This is plainly not hearsay.

and he goes on further....

"Apparently as defined, the application of the hearsay rule and jurisprudence on these evidences is done only by the courts."

You wanna start comparing personalities here. How about between the WB and those two senators? The WB report was just confirming what we already know here, coz if it would have been Senator Lacson who made the report himself, it would have been easier for you guys to ignore this issue.

[godwhacker]

As I have said I am not a lawyer. Maybe Mr. Sison has his own meaning of hearsay or he is just simply politicizing the word. How can you start counting headless witnesses as "solid evidence" that are only called by alphanumeric codes. Sa iya lang giingon daan "although there are also portions which are hearsay" so he himself would surely agree nga tainted na daan.

But something is coming up and this will be interesting. The WB officials will brief the senators. Let us watch what happens next. There are issues which are to be resolve first and the first one is I think which one amongst the report released by WB is genuine and which one is spurious? Who are the ones holding the genuine? And who are the ones holding the spurious?

[ceden_yu143]

is this case tackled seriously by the Justice Department here in the Philippines right now?....

[raphz]

i think lisud na maprove kung maabot na sa korte sa pinas. u know na nga dali au mabayaran ang tao ug dali sad mangahadlok ang mga witnesses. but still in the eyes of the ppl our government is very very corrupt. WB has rights to alleged as they have their own investigating team independent to anyone. and i think they are absolutely correct to what they have investigated. the World Bank is not just an ordinary group nga mo pasagad lang ug sulti. they r not d same group or agency here in the phil nga don't believe in anything but MONEY.

[baby_grace]

But the World Bank representatives said that it has no sufficient proof on any link between the FG and the contractors or even the bid rigging itself. As a lending firm, it made its own decision even if there was sufficient proof or not. The World Bank can decide on its own. The banning does not necessarily mean that there was in fact an irregularity. Hoffmann even said it is "more likely than not." He did not say it was absolutely a fact that there is an irregularity. Okay nga na iniimbestigahan eh. Pero the issue became political when some Senators tried to connect personalities na hindi naman daw yata kasali ayun mismo sa WB.

[crinkle]

@JerryMichael: excellent picture. team effort jud... tootally phat.

i'm watching the Reporter's Notebook right now. complete kaayo ilang lista sa tanang mga controversies ni FG.

[colossus]

The rule on evidence is mainly for the courts. But if the internal rules of Congress provide that the rules on evidence may be applied suppletorily, why can we not use it? After all, the rules on evidence may really be applied in the instant case.

The World Bank, as the institution, stated in its report, that corruption is more likely than not, present in the Philippines. However, the World Bank categorically denied stating that the report involved the First Gentleman in its report. It's different when people claim to be witness of the alleged corruption and when an institution says that it is witness to such corruption. They want to put a link when there is none. It does not necessarily follow that the people who claim to be witness of such corruption are also the people that the World Bank had in their investigation.

The opposition should not use the World Bank report if they want to prove that there is corruption that involves the First Gentleman because there is nothing in the report that says such.

[giddyboy]

^^^korekek. some people are easy to jump the bandwagon effect when in fact the WB categorically admitted it can't link FG in the case. Thanks to Ping, the damage has been done. Ganahan pud ani ang mga anti-Arroyo ug kaning na shot sa taro ni Lacson...hehe.

Butang2x pa dre ug pics nga libelous. A joke done in bad taste.

I know that at the back of some people's mind "ako may ilaron tits. involved gyud ani c FG ug mga Arroyo". well, c'mon. think about. decipher which is fact and which is hearsay...let's be fair naman w/ our opinions. as of now, we really can't pinpoint FG's involvement. maybe, maybe not.

I am not a lawyer but I agree w/ Miriam and Enrile.

Usa pud, gisakyan ra gyud ni sa opposition and made their usual spin. Saunz hapit naman ting election. 'Can't blame them. I see blood already this early...hehe

Some political jokes from the Professional Heckler:

"In a chance interview with GMA 7’s Joseph *****g outside the St. Luke’s Medical Center, First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo categorically denied his alleged involvement in the World Bank-funded road projects controversy. The reporter tried to obtain more info from Attorney Arroyo but his doctors had to intervene because every time the First Gentleman talks, his blood pressure shoots up, his skin turns pale, and his nose grows a centimeter longer."

---000---

"GMA News was able to interview First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo on his alleged involvement in the World Bank road projects mess. Attorney Arroyo admitted that he knew Eduardo De Luna of the blacklisted E.C. Construction Corporation. When the reporter asked how much he knew the guy, he replied, “Five percent.”

---000---

"According to his lawyer Ruy Rondain, he is not sure whether First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo’s doctors would allow him to attend the Senate hearing, but explained that Attorney Arroyo could play golf “because this is not stressful” - unless of course he overtakes the Pangandamans in the fairway."

---000---

"GMA News was able to interview First Gentleman Jose Miguel Arroyo outside the St. Luke’s Medical Center yesterday. With all the allegations being hurled against him, Attorney Arroyo admitted that he was angry… but not as angry as ABS-CBN News boss Maria Ressa who refused to accept her reporter’s excuse why GMA 7 outscooped them."

Have a good day everyone...