BACKBENCHER
Rod Kapunan
7/23-24/2011
The threshold limit that could effectively destroy what the people say as their “cherished democracy” is when the leader would openly violate the fundamental processes of how that democracy is supposed to work in a given society. That process, enshrined in the constitution, is either drafted directly by the people or through their representatives. It is through that process where our idealism is concretized in what French political thinker Jean Jacques Rousseau would call “social contract.”
Observance of that contract is imperative that anybody who would transgress that agreement is in effect seeking to destroy the very process upon which the social order in civil society is anchored. It is for this reason why states, no matter how liberally they may try to stretch the limits of freedom, would not think twice to sternly deal with political vandals by charging them either of treason, coup d’ etat, rebellion, subversion or sedition. These classes of crimes are of the highest level for they rob the soul of our democracy that as such would often exact from the perpetrators the supreme penalty of death or life imprisonment.
This is why crimes that tend to weaken or destroy the political and social order of society are met with sharp reaction. Such is the case for often the defensive state is compelled to exercise counter violence just to curtail the provocative violence unleashed by political vandals disguising themselves as messiahs, but whose principal objective is to plainly capture political power. They are far more dangerous than those criminals accused of murder, robbery, rape or graft because the consequence of the crime they commit create a deep wedge in our society, or could even plunge the state into a civil war that would cost the lives of innocent civilians.
We are compelled to explain the nature of this crime because it seems we continue to treat and pamper a person on the misguided notion that she once served as this country’s President. She continues to waddle around with arrogance unmindful that she stands as the country’s most notorious political vandal. The feat of political ignominy she committed in 2001, 2004 and 2007 has seemingly made her confident as some suspect she is behind the current rumblings to destabilize the Aquino administration in a bid to pre-empt any investigation against her for graft and corruption and prevent the possibility of her being pointed to as the mastermind behind the massive electoral fraud committed in 2004 and 2007. Some of her former henchmen are now pointing at her as the brains behind those acts of political swindling resulting in her having to remain in power beyond the term provided for in the Constitution.
On this score any attempt to vindicate the Constitution should begin on that blatant act of political vandalism she committed in 2001 where she ousted an overwhelmingly elected President. Maybe power grab is an extraordinary political process that could make the de facto status of her regime ripen to one of de jure as soon as she succeeds in imposing political stability. But some political scientists and legal luminaries doubt that kind of fictionalized political transition because Mrs. Arroyo did not declare a revolutionary government to officially scrap the constitution she vandalized. Rather, as usurper she used the very constitution to legitimize her illegal acts, which reason why she could be held wholly accountable and liable for her acts under the very Constitution she mangled and threw into the waste basket.
Worse, Mrs. Arroyo acted not only with calibrated malice, but sought in no uncertain terms to oust the duly elected President. Not satisfied, she orchestrated the filing of criminal charges against the ousted President despite the failure by her henchmen in the Senate to get the necessary vote to convict him. The conviction of the ousted President by the Kangaroo Court was therefore forthcoming, and that ugly episode now stands as legacy of that most despicable act of political vandalism. In fact, the justification made by the Supreme Court reduced the magistrates to nothing more but a bunch of political bootlicking clowns haggling to please Mrs. Arroyo, unmindful that their decision caused many constitutionalists to lose their mind.
Despite that blatant political transgression, Mrs. Arroyo again dared to cross the threshold; this time by committing massive electoral fraud to premeditatedly deprive presidential candidate Fernando Poe, Jr. of his sweet victory. The factual truth of that political swindling committed by her is now being concretized by an avalanche of evidence - although evidence before that were more than enough to haul her to court had it not been for the fact that she was still in power. The revelations made by former ARMM governor Zaldy Ampatuan and by that wanted Comelec election supervisor Lintang Bedol pointing to Mrs. Arroyo as the mastermind both in the 2004 and 2007 elections fraud only supplemented rather than reinforced the “Hello Garci” tapes and of her subsequent public confession of having committed that criminal act.
The prosecution of Mrs. Arroyo and her operatives should be President Aquino’s top priority. PNoy’s success in bagging the perpetrators who made a mockery of our democracy is the only way by which the Constitution could be vindicated. This task is Pnoy’s greatest challenge because democracy is not without its own political redemption. At the bottom are the people who were deprived of their right to vote on who should govern them. Failure to do it could boomerang on his leadership as utterly inept.
Worse, such ineptitude could even develop into a suspicion of collaboration for as successor, President Aquino could be mistaken as coddler and protector of the country’s most incorrigible political vandal. Paradoxically, while PNoy mulls on how he would decide on his own historical fate, the unrepentant operators are seemingly up at their bad habit of steering public disenchantment. This President Aquino much act decisively as the outcome sine qua non could prove all those charges against her for graft and corruption and plunder as rooted on the illegality of her coming to power.
(rodkap@yahoo.com.ph)
Sunday, July 24, 2011
Friday, July 22, 2011
FPJ supporters' vindication
DIE HARD III
Herman Tiu Laurel
7/22/2011
“First they ignore it, then they laugh at it, then they say they knew it all along.” — Alexander Humbold
Such was what the Edsa III masa and their populist supporters witnessed when they said that cheating in the 2004 elections was massive and incontrovertible. They were ignored. They were taunted. Rival candidate Sen. Panfilo Lacson, in trying to paint FPJ and his supporters as sour-grapes, even said, “Those who can’t protect their votes don’t have the right to run,” while others such as Akbayan’s Etta Rosales stood idly by to acclaim Gloria Arroyo’s stealth congressional proclamation in the dark, wee hours before dawn of June 23, 2004, as the nation slumbered.
FPJ supporters rallied and demonstrated. A memorable one was at the Welcome Rotonda in Quezon City, where we were dispersed after being cornered at the nearby McDonald’s outlet. A long chase ensued through the evening, ending up at Sto. Domingo Church, without any of us having an inkling that the next time we would converge there was to attend FPJ’s wake and kick-off the longest funeral queue in Philippine history.
Where are the notorious names we exposed in 2004? Where are Generals Esperon, Kyamko, Quevedo, Tolentino, Villanueva, Allaga, Pajarito, Habacon, Garcia; Rear Admiral De Leon; Colonels Ortiz, Baclayon, Gapay, Ardo, Lucero, Lactao, Pangilinan, Segovia, Gupana, Sumaylo, Capuyan; Majors Musngi, Masa, Nicolas, Sison; Garci wiretappers Col. Sumalo and Capuyan; Maj. Teofilo; SG Sage; and, of course, former Defense Secretaries (and retired generals) Hermogenes Ebdane and Eduardo Ermita, who went around military camps while using the military’s resources in campaigning against FPJ, telling soldiers, “Of course you will not vote for an actor… we should vote for the candidate who has the experience, appropriate academic background… etc.” in support of their patron Gloria?
At the same time, we also remember those servicemen with conscience who kept their integrity whole, such as Gen. Frank Gudani who faced court martial for being a so-called “erring personnel” as well as Col. Alex Balutan.
We also remember with disdain those civilians and politicians who were involved directly or indirectly, overtly or tacitly, in that dark episode by their silence. People should be reminded of the complicity of both the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) and National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel), which didn’t do anything but cover-up for the massive electoral fraud. Same goes for others such as “Mr. Noted” Kiko Pangilinan, Cory Aquino, Frank Drilon, “Hyatt 10,” and other participants.
The cheating in 2004 didn’t just include the so-called “Arroyo Generals” but the whole system that was established in Edsa II to ensure the continuity of what was started in 2001, which was to keep President Estrada in continued detention while averting the scuttling of a fast-tracked era of globalization, privatization and the corporatization of the Philippines, as well as the consolidation of Epira and the privatization of TransCo, etc., with an FPJ sitting in Malacañang.
After all, they must have known that FPJ’s first act in signaling his candidacy was to attend the anti-globalization conference of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) in UP.
But even as things didn’t go the nation’s way, FPJ supporters, including the most prominent of them all, President Joseph Estrada, who was working behind the scenes despite his incarceration at Tanay, still did not rest in their campaign to expose the truth.
Then, “Hello Garci” emerged.
The link to the sources back then was not yet timely to reveal, as security implications outweighed other considerations; but Samuel Ong and Sgt. Vidal Doble finally surfaced the tapes that provided incontrovertible proof of Arroyo’s direct hand in cheating operations. Subsequently, cellphone videos of some of the military’s cheating operations also emerged.
Scrambling to control the damage, GMA spokesman Ignacio Bunye obfuscated by producing a fake version of the tapes, before the issue went to Congress where, most significantly, then Rep. Noynoy Aquino voted not to play the real tapes.
The involvement of the military led to the Mayuga Commission which, to this day, has not been allowed to release its full report to the public (perhaps to allow Garcillano a chance to still preempt the Mayuga report?).
The Comelec at that time was perceive to be among the most guilty; and that was the root of the megalomania of Ben Abalos who allegedly said to the Chinese ZTE officials, “I am the most powerful man in the Philippines,” knowing that he could expose everything Gloria anytime did if he didn’t get his way.
How correct Greek dramatist Euripides was when he said, “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.” It was a mad era. The post-2001 Edsa II power grab and the 2004 election cheating age was one when those in power believed they could manipulate everything and get away with it forever. It was a time when black became white, good became bad, and the cheats ruled the law. But one-by-one, the Mad Hatters fell… (who next after Angie Reyes?)
A history of the Mad Era of the Arroyo government obviously can’t be chronicled here in full. We don’t even have enough space for the complicity of mainstream media, including the iconic columnists of some major newspapers.
But as this is only a gist, we will cap it off by acknowledging those who fought for FPJ’s vindication when certain quarters ignored and taunted them: The FPJ movements that are too many to mention; the FPJ voters; President Estrada; the Bagong Katipuneros (Magdalos) and the Para sa Bayan military groups; as well as those who still suffer injustice for standing up against Edsa II, such as lawyer Alan Paguia, still suspended by the Supreme Court when all that he stood up for are now being vindicated. While we are sad about FPJ’s daughter who apparently loves those who tormented her father more than those who supported him, we finally have to acknowledge the late FPJ’s courageous wife, Susan Roces, for continuing this fight, too.
(Tune in to Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m., and Sulo ng Pilipino, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, 6 to 7 p.m. on 1098AM; Talk News TV with HTL, Tuesday, 8 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11 p.m., on GNN, Destiny Cable Channel 8, on “DoST Expo 2011: Ignite the Mind”; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com and http://hermantiulaurel.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio)
Herman Tiu Laurel
7/22/2011
“First they ignore it, then they laugh at it, then they say they knew it all along.” — Alexander Humbold
Such was what the Edsa III masa and their populist supporters witnessed when they said that cheating in the 2004 elections was massive and incontrovertible. They were ignored. They were taunted. Rival candidate Sen. Panfilo Lacson, in trying to paint FPJ and his supporters as sour-grapes, even said, “Those who can’t protect their votes don’t have the right to run,” while others such as Akbayan’s Etta Rosales stood idly by to acclaim Gloria Arroyo’s stealth congressional proclamation in the dark, wee hours before dawn of June 23, 2004, as the nation slumbered.
FPJ supporters rallied and demonstrated. A memorable one was at the Welcome Rotonda in Quezon City, where we were dispersed after being cornered at the nearby McDonald’s outlet. A long chase ensued through the evening, ending up at Sto. Domingo Church, without any of us having an inkling that the next time we would converge there was to attend FPJ’s wake and kick-off the longest funeral queue in Philippine history.
Where are the notorious names we exposed in 2004? Where are Generals Esperon, Kyamko, Quevedo, Tolentino, Villanueva, Allaga, Pajarito, Habacon, Garcia; Rear Admiral De Leon; Colonels Ortiz, Baclayon, Gapay, Ardo, Lucero, Lactao, Pangilinan, Segovia, Gupana, Sumaylo, Capuyan; Majors Musngi, Masa, Nicolas, Sison; Garci wiretappers Col. Sumalo and Capuyan; Maj. Teofilo; SG Sage; and, of course, former Defense Secretaries (and retired generals) Hermogenes Ebdane and Eduardo Ermita, who went around military camps while using the military’s resources in campaigning against FPJ, telling soldiers, “Of course you will not vote for an actor… we should vote for the candidate who has the experience, appropriate academic background… etc.” in support of their patron Gloria?
At the same time, we also remember those servicemen with conscience who kept their integrity whole, such as Gen. Frank Gudani who faced court martial for being a so-called “erring personnel” as well as Col. Alex Balutan.
We also remember with disdain those civilians and politicians who were involved directly or indirectly, overtly or tacitly, in that dark episode by their silence. People should be reminded of the complicity of both the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV) and National Movement for Free Elections (Namfrel), which didn’t do anything but cover-up for the massive electoral fraud. Same goes for others such as “Mr. Noted” Kiko Pangilinan, Cory Aquino, Frank Drilon, “Hyatt 10,” and other participants.
The cheating in 2004 didn’t just include the so-called “Arroyo Generals” but the whole system that was established in Edsa II to ensure the continuity of what was started in 2001, which was to keep President Estrada in continued detention while averting the scuttling of a fast-tracked era of globalization, privatization and the corporatization of the Philippines, as well as the consolidation of Epira and the privatization of TransCo, etc., with an FPJ sitting in Malacañang.
After all, they must have known that FPJ’s first act in signaling his candidacy was to attend the anti-globalization conference of the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP) in UP.
But even as things didn’t go the nation’s way, FPJ supporters, including the most prominent of them all, President Joseph Estrada, who was working behind the scenes despite his incarceration at Tanay, still did not rest in their campaign to expose the truth.
Then, “Hello Garci” emerged.
The link to the sources back then was not yet timely to reveal, as security implications outweighed other considerations; but Samuel Ong and Sgt. Vidal Doble finally surfaced the tapes that provided incontrovertible proof of Arroyo’s direct hand in cheating operations. Subsequently, cellphone videos of some of the military’s cheating operations also emerged.
Scrambling to control the damage, GMA spokesman Ignacio Bunye obfuscated by producing a fake version of the tapes, before the issue went to Congress where, most significantly, then Rep. Noynoy Aquino voted not to play the real tapes.
The involvement of the military led to the Mayuga Commission which, to this day, has not been allowed to release its full report to the public (perhaps to allow Garcillano a chance to still preempt the Mayuga report?).
The Comelec at that time was perceive to be among the most guilty; and that was the root of the megalomania of Ben Abalos who allegedly said to the Chinese ZTE officials, “I am the most powerful man in the Philippines,” knowing that he could expose everything Gloria anytime did if he didn’t get his way.
How correct Greek dramatist Euripides was when he said, “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.” It was a mad era. The post-2001 Edsa II power grab and the 2004 election cheating age was one when those in power believed they could manipulate everything and get away with it forever. It was a time when black became white, good became bad, and the cheats ruled the law. But one-by-one, the Mad Hatters fell… (who next after Angie Reyes?)
A history of the Mad Era of the Arroyo government obviously can’t be chronicled here in full. We don’t even have enough space for the complicity of mainstream media, including the iconic columnists of some major newspapers.
But as this is only a gist, we will cap it off by acknowledging those who fought for FPJ’s vindication when certain quarters ignored and taunted them: The FPJ movements that are too many to mention; the FPJ voters; President Estrada; the Bagong Katipuneros (Magdalos) and the Para sa Bayan military groups; as well as those who still suffer injustice for standing up against Edsa II, such as lawyer Alan Paguia, still suspended by the Supreme Court when all that he stood up for are now being vindicated. While we are sad about FPJ’s daughter who apparently loves those who tormented her father more than those who supported him, we finally have to acknowledge the late FPJ’s courageous wife, Susan Roces, for continuing this fight, too.
(Tune in to Radyo OpinYon, Monday to Friday, 5 to 6 p.m., and Sulo ng Pilipino, Monday, Wednesday and Friday, 6 to 7 p.m. on 1098AM; Talk News TV with HTL, Tuesday, 8 to 9 p.m., with replay at 11 p.m., on GNN, Destiny Cable Channel 8, on “DoST Expo 2011: Ignite the Mind”; visit http://newkatipunero.blogspot.com and http://hermantiulaurel.blogspot.com for our articles plus TV and radio)
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
"Hello, Garci" - Revisited
Alan F. Paguia
Former Professor of Law
Ateneo Law School
University of Batangas
Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila
alanpaguia@yahoo.com
July 20, 2011
In the presidential elections of 2004, did Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) cheat and win over Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ) by more than ONE MILLION (1,000,000) votes, with the connivance of then Commission on Elections (Comelec) Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano per the recorded or taped telephone conversation between GMA and Garcillano?
It is respectfully submitted the answer is YES.
MATERIAL FACTS
1. On June 8, 2005, Rep. Francis Escudero delivered a privilege speech before the House of Representatives citing recorded telephone conversations between respondent Garcillano and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, wherein the two (2) communicants talked about and agreed to ensure the electoral victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over her closest rival, Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ).
2. On June 27, 2005, the recorded telephone conversations were publicly admitted and apologized for by Mrs. Arroyo in a speech aired over national radio and television. On the same date, a complaint for impeachment against Mrs. Arroyo was filed with the House of Representatives by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano.
3. On June 28, 2005, Atty. Lozano filed with the House of Representatives his Supplemental Complaint for Impeachment versus Mrs. Arroyo. Congressional records show Atty. Lozano’s complaint and supplemental complaint were endorsed by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta by way of an undated one-page Resolution of Endorsement, and another one-page verification of his endorsement subscribed and sworn to on June 29, 2005.
4. On June 30, 2005, the joint committee hearing of the House of Representatives (Committees on Public Information, on Public Order and Safety, on National Defense and Security, on Information Communications Technology, and on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms) officially played the compact disc (CD) of Alan F. Paguia which contained the recording of the aforementioned telephone conversations between Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo.
5. On July 4, 2005, Paguia received a subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30, 2005, and a letter of invitation from the Committee on Public Information of the House of Representatives, dated July 4, 2004, which required him to testify and provide inputs to the joint committee hearings.
6. On July 18, 2005, Mrs. Arroyo duly filed her verified 13-page ANSWER EX ABUNDANTE AD CAUTELAM with the House of Representatives, with the following prayer for specific remedies:
“WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Complaint for Impeachment dated 27 June 2005 and the Supplemental Complaint for Impeachment dated 28 June 2005 filed by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano, and endorsed by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta of the Alagad Party List in his Resolution of Endorsement dated 29 June 2005, be dismissed.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.”
7. The recorded voice of respondent Garcillano was positively identified: (a) by Rep. Jun Macarambon during the official House proceedings where he admitted having had telephone conversations during the same material period with respondent Garcillano whom he referred to several times as “Commissioner Garci;” and (b) by respondent Mrs. Arroyo herself who referred to Commissioner Garcillano as “Garci” in the taped conversation.
8. The recorded voice of respondent Mrs. Arroyo and her recorded conversation with respondent Garcillano was subsequently admitted by her in certain public statements.
9. The voices of both GMA and Garcillano are matters of public knowledge.
10. The voice of Garcillano is personally known to his former co-Commissioners in the Comelec. It is within the mandatory quasi-judicial or judicial notice of the Commission.
Sole Issue
11. WHETHER THE COMELEC, ON THE BASES OF THE RECORDED CONVERSATIONS AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS, SHOULD INVESTIGATE MRS. ARROYO AND GARCILLANO FOR ELECTION FRAUDS, OFFENSES AND MALPRACTICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS DUTY UNDER SECTION 2, ARTICLE IX-C OF THE 1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION?
It is respectfully submitted the answer is YES.
ARGUMENTS
12. When GMA and Garcillano came to an agreement and decided to ensure the electoral victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over her closest rival presidential candidate, they conspired by misrepresenting the final result of the elections in her favor.
13. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted the existence of the issue of the voice recordings.
14. She has officially admitted the public deserves an explanation from her.
15. She has admitted having telephone conversations during the election canvassing process with Garcillano whom she referred to in the recorded conversations as “Garci.”
16. Mrs. Arroyo has not denied it was her voice which was recorded conversing with Garcillano in the taped conversations in spite of so much opportunity to do so.
17. Her defense - to the effect that it was not her intent to influence the outcome of the election – is immaterial. Election offenses are covered by special laws which are mala prohibita. It is elementary in law that in mala prohibita offenses, intent is not an element.
18. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted having committed the wrongful act of making a telephone call to Garcillano and discussing with him the protection of her votes and ensuring her margin by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over FPJ. She characterized her wrongful act as “a lapse in judgment” and publicly apologized as follows:
“Nagagambala ako. Maliwanag na may kakulangan sa wastong pagpapasya ang nangyaring pagtawag sa telepono. Pinagsisisihan ko ito ng lubos. Pinananagutan ko nang lubusan ang aking mga ginawa at humihingi ako ng tawad sa inyo, sa lahat ng mga butihing mamamayan na nabawasan ng tiwala dahil sa mga pangyayaring ito. …”
19. The verified Answer in the complaint for impeachment against her was signed jointly by Mrs. Arroyo and her legal counsel, Atty. Pedro Ferrer. In other words, she had:
(a) publicly joined issues with Atty. Lozano’s complaint/supplemental complaint; and
(b) voluntarily submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives.
She has thereby waived any legal immunity from investigation; and is further estopped from invoking any such immunity.
20. The playing of the recorded telephone conversation between GMA and Garcillano, in Congress constitutes an official act of the legislature, which is within the mandatory quasi-judicial notice of the Comelec.
21. The public interest over the subject recorded telephone conversations necessarily prevails over any private interest.
Complaint filed on March 6, 2007
22. On March 5, 2007, then Comelec Commissioner Resurreccion Borra stated in a nationally televised interview that the Comelec has taken no action on the “Hello, Garci” controversy for the simple reason that no one has filed a corresponding complaint before the Commission.
23. On March 6, 2007, Paguia filed with the Comelec/Law Department, his Complaint-Affidavit bearing the same date, versus Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo, praying for the Comelec to investigate the respondents in accordance with its duty under Section 2, Article IX-C of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, and Rule 34, Comelec Rules of Procedure.
The original complaint was duly accompanied by supporting evidence, namely:
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A - Rep. Francis Escudero’s privilege speech, dated June 8, 2005
B - GMA’s "I am sorry" speech, dated June 27, 2005
C - Atty. Lozano’s complaint, dated June 27, 2005
D - Supplemental Complaint, dated June 28, 2005
E - Resolution of Endorsement, undated
F - Verification of Endorsement, dated June 29, 2005
G - "Hello, Garci" Compact Disc (CD), 36-minute recording
H - Subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30, 2005
I - Letter of Invitation, dated July 4, 2005
J - GMA's “Answer ex abundante ad cautelam”, dated July 18, 2005
Epilogue
24. From March 6, 2007 up to this writing, or a period of more than FOUR (4) YEARS, the Comelec and its commissioners appear to have chosen to SIT and TAKE NO ACTION on the Complaint-Affidavit. Since the complaint has not been dismissed, it follows the controversy remains LEGALLY ALIVE.
25. How much more time will the Comelec take until it performs its constitutional duty to investigate Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo?
The sovereign Filipino people are waiting.
Former Professor of Law
Ateneo Law School
University of Batangas
Pamantasan ng Lungsod ng Maynila
alanpaguia@yahoo.com
July 20, 2011
In the presidential elections of 2004, did Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) cheat and win over Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ) by more than ONE MILLION (1,000,000) votes, with the connivance of then Commission on Elections (Comelec) Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano per the recorded or taped telephone conversation between GMA and Garcillano?
It is respectfully submitted the answer is YES.
MATERIAL FACTS
1. On June 8, 2005, Rep. Francis Escudero delivered a privilege speech before the House of Representatives citing recorded telephone conversations between respondent Garcillano and Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, wherein the two (2) communicants talked about and agreed to ensure the electoral victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over her closest rival, Fernando Poe, Jr. (FPJ).
2. On June 27, 2005, the recorded telephone conversations were publicly admitted and apologized for by Mrs. Arroyo in a speech aired over national radio and television. On the same date, a complaint for impeachment against Mrs. Arroyo was filed with the House of Representatives by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano.
3. On June 28, 2005, Atty. Lozano filed with the House of Representatives his Supplemental Complaint for Impeachment versus Mrs. Arroyo. Congressional records show Atty. Lozano’s complaint and supplemental complaint were endorsed by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta by way of an undated one-page Resolution of Endorsement, and another one-page verification of his endorsement subscribed and sworn to on June 29, 2005.
4. On June 30, 2005, the joint committee hearing of the House of Representatives (Committees on Public Information, on Public Order and Safety, on National Defense and Security, on Information Communications Technology, and on Suffrage and Electoral Reforms) officially played the compact disc (CD) of Alan F. Paguia which contained the recording of the aforementioned telephone conversations between Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo.
5. On July 4, 2005, Paguia received a subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30, 2005, and a letter of invitation from the Committee on Public Information of the House of Representatives, dated July 4, 2004, which required him to testify and provide inputs to the joint committee hearings.
6. On July 18, 2005, Mrs. Arroyo duly filed her verified 13-page ANSWER EX ABUNDANTE AD CAUTELAM with the House of Representatives, with the following prayer for specific remedies:
“WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the Complaint for Impeachment dated 27 June 2005 and the Supplemental Complaint for Impeachment dated 28 June 2005 filed by Atty. Oliver O. Lozano, and endorsed by Rep. Rodante D. Marcoleta of the Alagad Party List in his Resolution of Endorsement dated 29 June 2005, be dismissed.
Other reliefs just and equitable under the premises are likewise prayed for.”
7. The recorded voice of respondent Garcillano was positively identified: (a) by Rep. Jun Macarambon during the official House proceedings where he admitted having had telephone conversations during the same material period with respondent Garcillano whom he referred to several times as “Commissioner Garci;” and (b) by respondent Mrs. Arroyo herself who referred to Commissioner Garcillano as “Garci” in the taped conversation.
8. The recorded voice of respondent Mrs. Arroyo and her recorded conversation with respondent Garcillano was subsequently admitted by her in certain public statements.
9. The voices of both GMA and Garcillano are matters of public knowledge.
10. The voice of Garcillano is personally known to his former co-Commissioners in the Comelec. It is within the mandatory quasi-judicial or judicial notice of the Commission.
Sole Issue
11. WHETHER THE COMELEC, ON THE BASES OF THE RECORDED CONVERSATIONS AND PUBLIC STATEMENTS, SHOULD INVESTIGATE MRS. ARROYO AND GARCILLANO FOR ELECTION FRAUDS, OFFENSES AND MALPRACTICES IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS DUTY UNDER SECTION 2, ARTICLE IX-C OF THE 1987 PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION?
It is respectfully submitted the answer is YES.
ARGUMENTS
12. When GMA and Garcillano came to an agreement and decided to ensure the electoral victory of Mrs. Arroyo by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over her closest rival presidential candidate, they conspired by misrepresenting the final result of the elections in her favor.
13. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted the existence of the issue of the voice recordings.
14. She has officially admitted the public deserves an explanation from her.
15. She has admitted having telephone conversations during the election canvassing process with Garcillano whom she referred to in the recorded conversations as “Garci.”
16. Mrs. Arroyo has not denied it was her voice which was recorded conversing with Garcillano in the taped conversations in spite of so much opportunity to do so.
17. Her defense - to the effect that it was not her intent to influence the outcome of the election – is immaterial. Election offenses are covered by special laws which are mala prohibita. It is elementary in law that in mala prohibita offenses, intent is not an element.
18. Mrs. Arroyo has publicly admitted having committed the wrongful act of making a telephone call to Garcillano and discussing with him the protection of her votes and ensuring her margin by at least one million (1,000,000) votes over FPJ. She characterized her wrongful act as “a lapse in judgment” and publicly apologized as follows:
“Nagagambala ako. Maliwanag na may kakulangan sa wastong pagpapasya ang nangyaring pagtawag sa telepono. Pinagsisisihan ko ito ng lubos. Pinananagutan ko nang lubusan ang aking mga ginawa at humihingi ako ng tawad sa inyo, sa lahat ng mga butihing mamamayan na nabawasan ng tiwala dahil sa mga pangyayaring ito. …”
19. The verified Answer in the complaint for impeachment against her was signed jointly by Mrs. Arroyo and her legal counsel, Atty. Pedro Ferrer. In other words, she had:
(a) publicly joined issues with Atty. Lozano’s complaint/supplemental complaint; and
(b) voluntarily submitted herself to the jurisdiction of the House of Representatives.
She has thereby waived any legal immunity from investigation; and is further estopped from invoking any such immunity.
20. The playing of the recorded telephone conversation between GMA and Garcillano, in Congress constitutes an official act of the legislature, which is within the mandatory quasi-judicial notice of the Comelec.
21. The public interest over the subject recorded telephone conversations necessarily prevails over any private interest.
Complaint filed on March 6, 2007
22. On March 5, 2007, then Comelec Commissioner Resurreccion Borra stated in a nationally televised interview that the Comelec has taken no action on the “Hello, Garci” controversy for the simple reason that no one has filed a corresponding complaint before the Commission.
23. On March 6, 2007, Paguia filed with the Comelec/Law Department, his Complaint-Affidavit bearing the same date, versus Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo, praying for the Comelec to investigate the respondents in accordance with its duty under Section 2, Article IX-C of the 1987 Philippine Constitution, and Rule 34, Comelec Rules of Procedure.
The original complaint was duly accompanied by supporting evidence, namely:
LIST OF EXHIBITS
A - Rep. Francis Escudero’s privilege speech, dated June 8, 2005
B - GMA’s "I am sorry" speech, dated June 27, 2005
C - Atty. Lozano’s complaint, dated June 27, 2005
D - Supplemental Complaint, dated June 28, 2005
E - Resolution of Endorsement, undated
F - Verification of Endorsement, dated June 29, 2005
G - "Hello, Garci" Compact Disc (CD), 36-minute recording
H - Subpoena duces tecum, dated June 30, 2005
I - Letter of Invitation, dated July 4, 2005
J - GMA's “Answer ex abundante ad cautelam”, dated July 18, 2005
Epilogue
24. From March 6, 2007 up to this writing, or a period of more than FOUR (4) YEARS, the Comelec and its commissioners appear to have chosen to SIT and TAKE NO ACTION on the Complaint-Affidavit. Since the complaint has not been dismissed, it follows the controversy remains LEGALLY ALIVE.
25. How much more time will the Comelec take until it performs its constitutional duty to investigate Garcillano and Mrs. Arroyo?
The sovereign Filipino people are waiting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
