back to gloria arroyo

04 June 2012

may kaso ba?  she’s in “jail” but the electoral sabotage case was weak to begin with.  read winnie monsod’s ‘Get real‘ 14 March 2012:

In the Arroyo case, the only evidence against her was the “eyewitness” report of Maguindanao Provincial Administrator Norie Unas, whose story strains credulity from the beginning: he “overheard” Gloria Arroyo giving orders to Maguindanao Governor Andal Ampatuan “sa isang sulok” in Malacañang that the results in the senatorial elections in Maguindanao should be 12-0. And then what is clearly hearsay: Ampatuan told him that he (Ampatuan) could not say no to the Arroyos. Norie Unas, by the way, was accused of being in charge of the backhoe operations for the burial of the Maguindanao massacre victims. Moreover, his story was never corroborated, and, following DoJ logic (in the Ortega case), should never have been given credence. Many holes in the story. Yet, it was not only given credence, but it was considered strong enough evidence so that Gloria Arroyo was not granted bail. Charged with electoral sabotage in an election in which she was not even a candidate.

so when i read here’s the latest from ellen tordesillas: Gloria Arroyo may be out on bail, thanks to DOJ-Comelec

Last Thursday , Felda Domingo, spokesperson of Pasay City Regional Trial Court Judge Jesus Mupas, said there is a possibility that the motion for bail will be granted because the complainant in the case, which is the Comelec, had failed to present two key witnesses who were supposed to affirm conspiracy between the accused in allegedly rigging the results of the 2007 elections in Maguindanao.

The accused are Arroyo, former Commission on Elections (Comelec) Chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr., former Maguindanao Governor Andal Ampatuan Sr., and former Maguindanao Election Supervisor Lintang Bedol .

The two witnesses are former Maguindanao Administrator Norie Unas and Russam Mabang,former election officer of Pandag, Maguindanao.

Comelec lawyer Maria Juana Valesa said they have lost contact with Mabang and Unas, who is under the Witness Protection Program, does not want to appear in court for security reasons.

my first reaction was, wha?!?  she’ll be out on bail?  i googled it, only to find that no one else is commenting on it, so far, as in, no one’s hooting at the DOJ except from ellen’s comment thread.

I guess the attitude is, it doesn’t matter, that case has served its purpose, got gloria arroyo arrested and prevented from leaving the country last november?  anyway, if, when, she’s allowed bail, they’ll just arrest her again for graft charges in the NBN-ZTE deal?

but wait, mike arroyo is also charged in that one and he was allowed to post bail 10 days later.  plunder is a bailable offense pala?  but wait again.  erap was charged for plunder, too, but wasn’t allowed to post bail; although after more than three years detention in camp capinpin, the sandiganbayan allowed him to move to his nearby rest house in tanay, under house arrest.

hmm.  naguluhan na ako.  ano ba talaga ang batas?  here we go again.

11 Responses to back to gloria arroyo

  1. June 4, 2012 at 9:00 pm

    Hi Katrina, plunder is not bailable but graft is.

    In the NBN/ZTE. Gloria and Mike Arroyo were charged only of violation of the anti-graft law.

    There are a number of plunder cases filed with the Ombudsman in connection with the Fertilizer scam, PCSO and OWWA Funds, but they are still in the preliminary investigation stage. There’s no resolution yet on any of those plunder charges that would elevate teh case to the Sandiganbayan. It’s not even sure if after looking at the available evidence, the Ombudsman would affirm the plunder charge or downgrade it to graft which was what happened to the NBN/ZTE case.

  2. June 4, 2012 at 9:12 pm

    Clearly, the case of electoral sabotage in connection with the 2007 elections is a loser.

    You are right. It was just filed to justify the imprisonment of Arroyo because at that time, there was no case filed against her. Remember there was no hold departure order which can only be issued by the court? Arroyo was prevented from leaving on Nov. 15, 2011 on the strength of De Lima’s inclusion of her in the watch list.

    Common sense. A person who is in the watch list is being watched/monitored. Not held of prevented from leaving.

    Aquino’s people know that they can’t detain Arroyo for long without a court order. That’s why they had to file a case that is non-bailable. De Lima, I understand, was not familiar with fertilizer scam and other cases.

    De Lima is an election lawyer. So that’s what she filed.

    Now, she is looking for witnesses. Ay naku. She might be the next chief justice of the Supreme Court of the Philippines.

    • June 4, 2012 at 9:24 pm

      siguro that’s why they’re so quiet about gma these days. nasa bitag ng alanganin? i hope de lima does better with the nbn-zte case.

  3. June 5, 2012 at 12:16 am

    Elllen.. you think Leila would be CJ? I still think it would be Carpio.

    • June 5, 2012 at 8:17 pm

      @J, I agree. If he criteria will be based on seniority,academic achievements and judicial experience plus the fact that his track records has shown his independence and not a political lackey, he deserves my vote.

      • June 6, 2012 at 8:37 am

        In fairness to Carpio and Conchita, both of them declined JBC nominations in 2010 on grounds it would be a midnight appointment. They have delicadeza, at least.

        • June 6, 2012 at 11:24 am
          baycas

          In fairness to all of us, may Carpio just continue with his delicadeza and inhibit from the short list if ever nominated?

          • June 6, 2012 at 10:03 pm

            did i hear one senator recommending that we insulate the judiciary from partisan politics by not appointing elected and/or cabinet officials? This makes sense if we want an independent and no-patronage politics in the justice system.

  4. June 5, 2012 at 12:18 am

    The case filed at Ombudsman re ZTE was initially plunder, but COnchita downgraded to graft (bailable), hence she can still get bail (but doubt if she can leave country)

  5. June 5, 2012 at 12:32 am
    baycas

    “We want to tell the public that the fight is not yet over. They are saying that since our main witness disappeared, our case against [Arroyo] had weakened. Not true. Our principal witness (Unas) is still here and he is going to testify if the court will give us the opportunity to present him,” Brillantes added in a Rappler report.

    The Comelec chief said that they have decided not to present Unas “to make sure of his security.”

    Arroyo’s motion for bail in poll fraud case may be granted – Pasay court
    Friday, 01 June 2012 10:37 Janvic Mateo

    thepocdotnet

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

twitter

follow @stuartsantiago on twitter

recent comments

  • © Angela Stuart-Santiago