corona impeachment is to save hacienda luisita?

13 December 2011

i thought the house of reps was working on impeaching supreme court justice mariano del castillo for plagiarism.  as it turns out, that was just a distraction.  behind the scenes, the reps (188! medyo o.a.)were working pala on the impeachment of bigger, nay, the biggest, fish, chief justice renato corona.  phnoy’s valte and rep. tupas et al can deny it all they want, but clearly the prez was behind it — i just heard him gloating on anc as he addressed house allies — and it’s quite believable, as edcel lagman claims, that many reps signed to make sure they get their pork barrel next year (ay, shades of gma) and, of course, marami sa kanila ay pumoposisyon for the basbas of phnoy sa 2013 elections.

blogs carlos conde:

According to this story from @moveph and the venerable @glendamgloria … President Aquino’s recent attacks against the Supreme Court were calculated, designed to prepare the public for the possible impeachment of the “last Arroyo holdout,” Supreme Court chief justice Renato Corona, whose court the Aquino administration has accused of being obstructionist in its fight against corruption.

The strategy is brilliant: to make Corona’s impeachment in Congress easier (given that Filipino politicians respond better to the supposed public pulse than the law and the Constitution), he must first be impeached from the public mind.

and like caloy i suspect that it’s not all just about gma but also about hacienda luisita:

But before I can believe that all of this is for good governance and against corruption and all that, let me make a simple challenge, one that will remove a huge doubt on the motives of the president:

The government should first implement the Supreme Court order on Hacienda Luisita and distribute the land to farmer-beneficiaries. (Distribute it, that is, as ordered by the high court. So none of that higher land valuation and more beneficiaries gambit by Hacienda Luisita Inc.) This time, actually distribute the land. Immediately. Before any Supreme Court impeachment happens.

The next Corona-less Supreme Court should no longer have to handle the Luisita case. Changing the composition of the Supreme Court and then letting this new court decide on the Luisita case is no different from packing the jury. No different, in fact, from Arroyo packing the Supreme Court with her own appointees.

If the government cannot or will not distribute the crown jewel of Aquino’s family before of all of this Corona contretemps comes to a head, all of this is suspect.

i hear the pressure is on for corona to resign a la merceditas and save us all the trouble of a senate trial.  i’m hoping corona doesn’t cave in.  i want to hear his defense.

the question of course is, who will phnoy appoint in his place.  pinoyexchange forum‘s fearless forecast: antonio carpio: “alam na ni Carpio ang gagawin niya”.  abangan.

58 Responses to corona impeachment is to save hacienda luisita?

  1. December 13, 2011 at 4:08 pm
    GabbyD

    i dont get it. HL was a unanimous decision right?

  2. December 13, 2011 at 5:02 pm
    Anonymous

    @GabbyD

    True. Plus this Aquino-Corona thing started way before HL. Remember the oath-taking?

  3. December 13, 2011 at 5:37 pm
    17Sphynx17

    I really don’t understand it. This move is clearly a wrong move by the Aquino Administration and opposite his claim of “matuwid na daan”.

    The sad part is, he is showing how “traditional” of a politician he can be.

    Granted that the objective to go after past wrong doings is correct, but the approach to it and actions leading to how to achieve it is all wrong. As such, the end does not justify the means.

    And the supreme court rules on a majority vote and not just based on the Chief Justice, if majority found certain actions/moves questionable on the part of the Aquino Administration, it is in fact the administration’s fault and the supreme court is doing what is just and part of their mandate.

    I still do not see how the TRO against Arroyo’s WLO was a biased decision because during the time the TRO was issued, there was no formal case filed against her, hence giving no justification for the WLO. Now, if Arroyo did end up flying without completing the requirements as stated in the WLO, it would have clearly been a different matter as the SC did not adhere by its own ruling which is wrong. But De Lima stepped in and clearly disrepected the SC and I find that so questionable and a clear obstruction of justice by the DOJ secretary herself. Odd right?

    This would be a media trial by publicity for Corona, I really hope it ends well for him and the public do not simply adhere to seeing him as immediately guilty without justifying the facts.

    As for the question of the truth commission, I believe that it was redundant. We have the ombudsman, just have it under them instead of a new body/entity. It was so simple, yet he chose to make it more complicated (Aquino I mean).

  4. December 13, 2011 at 5:42 pm
    17Sphynx17

    Oh and by the way, why is most of the media I am reading stating that Corona is in fact “impeached” when there has been no ruling yet but is leading only to impeachment proceedings.

    Is it also to implant a negative light or connotation on Corona as immediately wrong subconsciously to smoothen things for the public frenzy to gobble up?

    • December 13, 2011 at 8:28 pm
      baycas2

      Yesterday, Corona was indeed impeached.

      A conviction or acquittal will be the result once tried at the Senate.

    • December 14, 2011 at 2:06 am
      manuelbuencamino

      The House impeaches. The Senate convicts or acquits.

  5. December 13, 2011 at 7:36 pm

    Will the President sacrifice enormous political capital to save Hacienda Luisita? Will the next Supreme Court reverse the hacienda ruling, considering that the decision was unanimous in the first place? I’m sorry, but it’s hard for me to buy the Luisita angle. And I’m not an Aquino fan.

  6. December 13, 2011 at 7:41 pm

    unanimous nga, pero pinagdedebatehan pa ng supreme court ang tungkol sa “just compensation” and sa “insolvency” problem.

    • December 13, 2011 at 9:48 pm

      But the fact is that the Aquino appointees voted to re-distribute Luisita in the first place. This means they are most likely not biased. This means even if Corona is impeached, it won’t be an Aquino Court.

  7. December 13, 2011 at 9:00 pm
    Diehard Pinoy

    Let the “RULE OF LAW” apply and not “speculative disposition”. Before, the gridlock for good govt was Congress vs- Executive, now the bottleneck is the arbitrariness of the SC. Who must check the unilateral and onerous interpretation of the basic law of the land? Are the magistrates infallible as the Pope who are as human and imperfect like us? The HL case is a final landmark decision,cannot be reversed nor amended even by a change of magistrates. therefore, I do not see any hidden agenda by Pinoy.

  8. December 14, 2011 at 12:23 am
    17Sphynx17

    Well, as long as during this impeachment process, the masses don’t quickly judge (via trial by publicity) and bear in mind the weight of the facts and arguements presented during the proceedings (highly doubtful though that the masses would care to) to avoid disrupting the process and “judging” for themselves.

    Kind of like what they did with Erap. I don’t think he didn’t do anything wrong. The jueteng this is the most likely culprit during his term but he was being charged with something else. He was being tried for something he didn’t do, but he has the right to protect himself against self-incrimination. If the proceedings went as planned, I don’t think the impeachment case against erap would have gone anywhere as the case was plunder right? Or pointing towards acquiring funds from the government illegally. He wasn’t stealing from the government, he got his funds somewhere else (jeuteng was the likely culprit but not related to the case but stating such would have incriminated him in another crime).

    So if we get another “Sealed envelope voting instance” here, don’t march in the streets. And be objective about what the proceedings actually contain. Observe both sides, the defense as well as the prosecution.

    You could say Corona is Bias, but who is to say that Aquino’s men and whoever will be placed later are not/will not be be blindly on his side and not stick with the rule of law? This just looks like a politically motivated move rather than a proper action by Aquino and his alliance. He wants to make sure that railroading his agenda is easier.

    Imagine the truth commission issue alone was a redundancy in a branch of government known as the Ombudsman. He should have just strengthened it from the very beginning and beefed up its forces to quickly investigate and take action against erring officials, both in the past as well as in the present.

    Second, if contracts made in the past were questioned because of the supposed anomalies, then let’s be honest here, all government contracts have in one way or another benefited someone inside. We are not blind here right? Shouldn’t all contracts have been subject for review on all national and local levels so that next year, everything will be on a clean slate but no. He specifically pinpoints projects by his predecessor only? Why is that?

    I mean he’s clearly shown that he does not honor any contract, local or foreign, so if you are going to do it like that, do it collectively not selectively. Bids and Awards Committees should be ensured to be doing their jobs. If they lack manpower, they should be provided with it.

    We are trying to make sure everything as much as possible goes through bidding to ensure best price with best quality (not lowest price).

    Oh and yeah, the TRO wasn’t the last straw, it’s more like the HL case as Aquino would like to point out. Timeline begs to differ, he was less vocal before the HL case was finally decided on.

    • December 14, 2011 at 5:27 am
      baycas2

      gloria’s Crown once told the public through media to “watch me.”

      He was being watched since then and gloria’s Crown earned a net ZERO satisfaction rating.

      Some or all of the charges in the Articles of Impeachment being leveled against him may have been the reason/s.

      He has to account for these charges in a political exercise as enshrined in the Constitution.

  9. December 14, 2011 at 2:21 am
    manuelbuencamino

    Better for Corona to resign.

    1. Because fighting it out will lead to more divisiveness. He should take his cue from GMA’s “I will not run” speech. His presence in the Court is not good for the Court.

    2. Because he could be convicted.

    3. Because even if he is acquitted, questions about his character will remain. He is too identified with GMA. Furthermore, the public will tag senators who vote to acquit him as GMA partisans or worst, that they were bribed to vote for his acquittal. So he will be bringing senators down with him.

    I’m not saying Corona is guilty of the charges against him. All I’m saying is he is already convicted by the public and a Senate acquittal is not going to change anything.

    4. Because resignation will allow the Court to move on, to work towards resurrecting its credibility. Corona by fighting it out will be sacrificing the institution in a futile attempt to regain his reputation.

    5. Because resignation will be more noble than getting into a brawl on the Senate floor. He can deliver a high-minded resignation speech (again the I will not run speech of his padrona) and he will at least look like he sacrificed his personal interest for the institution that he claims he loves so much.

    • December 14, 2011 at 3:10 am
      GabbyD

      convicted of what? from the articles of impeachment, none of it is a crime.

      • December 14, 2011 at 3:22 am
        manuelbuencamino

        Gabby,

        The House files articles of impeachment. The Senate votes to convict or acquit. If the charge is betrayal of public trust then the Senate votes to acquit or convict on that charge.

        Look at the grounds for impeachment. That is what the senate votes on. And the terms used for the votes are acquittal and conviction.

        We’re not talking about the RTC we are talking about an impeachment court.

      • December 14, 2011 at 3:27 am
        GabbyD

        mb,

        yeah, its just that i dont get your analysis. why is one of the reasons he should resign is that he could be “convicted”?

        resigning is tantamount to being convicted. by resigning the 100% gets the punishment of an impeachment trial.

        but at least, going through a trial affords one to the opportunity to defend oneself.

        • December 14, 2011 at 4:37 am
          baycas2

          Please tell gloria’s Merci that she was already convicted when she resigned. It might be well also to hint the same to gloria’s Crown.

        • December 14, 2011 at 12:18 pm
          manuelbuencamino

          resigning is like “nolo contendere” a plea by which a defendant in a criminal prosecution accepts conviction as though a guilty plea had been entered but does not admit guilt.
          conviction removes all doubt of guilt.

        • December 15, 2011 at 4:07 pm
          manuelbuencamino

          Gabby,

          Tantamount is not the same as. Kaya may plea na tinatawag na “nolo contendere”.

          Nolo contendere means, “I will not fight it but at the same time I am not admitting guilt.”

          Sa tagalog, “Hayaan mo na, magpapasko naman. Pero hindi ako umaamin na may ginawa akong masama.”

    • December 15, 2011 at 3:38 am

      Come to think of it, Corona staying could be what Arroyo wants. It would prolong the impeachment trial; and, even if he is impeached, Arroyo justices still comprise the majority, which means Aquino would have to impeach del Castillo too. All these would drag on and on, and would consume the President’s political capital. Meanwhile, Arroyo will sit it out, let the Pinoy’s short attention span expire, and hope to find a friendlier administration come 2016.

      • December 15, 2011 at 2:09 pm
        Bert

        I think that Noynoy can live with the other justices but not with Corona. Corona was too personally involved with GMA he cannot do anything but support her, his boss for such a long period.

        Without the personal influence of Corona as their chief, the other justices can now think independently and impartially without incurring the displeasure of their chief who is vent on protecting and defending her.

  10. December 14, 2011 at 3:24 am
    manuelbuencamino

    angela,

    Malabo yan HL-Corona impeachment link. It’s a bit of a stretch to connect the two.

    • December 14, 2011 at 12:11 pm

      you think? well, we’ll see soon enough. sabi nga ni malou tiquia sa facebook: “ang matuwid na daan ay blitzkrieg sa bilis.”

      • December 14, 2011 at 12:25 pm
        manuelbuencamino

        Malou Tiquia? Is that Juana Change?

        • December 14, 2011 at 12:29 pm

          mae paner is juana change. malou tiquia is a political analyst, with publicus asia inc., madalas sa anc

          • December 14, 2011 at 12:56 pm

            hi angela, i understand that a “political analyst” can also be a pr person or a lobbyist. is he/she obliged to disclose his/her client if such is involved in the matter at hand?

            specifically, how would we know if malou tiquia, for example, has the gma camp as a client? do we simply rely on her say-so?

            i have similar questions on such entities as move.ph. who finances them? are they obliged to disclose?

            i’ve noticed or i believe a lot of blogosphere traffic on the CJ matter is astro-turf. i suppose it’s a world of caveat lector.

  11. December 14, 2011 at 7:35 am

    If Corona is convicted he will not be eligible for any public office anymore, if he thinks he stands a chance of getting cleared then slug it out. On that account resignation offers a better deal for him, he can just wait out this administration and gamble on the next likely party in power….. Or better yet he should just ruin este run for an elective office, with his notoriety he has a huge chance of winning, just look at Bong2 Marcos, arsonist Bing Bong Crisologo and others of the same mold, LOL….

  12. December 14, 2011 at 1:19 pm

    orlando :) what’s “astro-turf”?

    • December 14, 2011 at 2:18 pm

      if media has envelopmental journalism, bloggers and commenters have astroturf. it is paid posts or comments, organized by pr firms on behalf of unnamed clients.

      http://www.crttbuzzbin.com/2007/08/06/astroturfing-on-the-dark-side-of-the-moon/

      • December 14, 2011 at 2:24 pm

        ah ok. true, about the blogosphere. i believe katrina and i belong to a small group of indie political bloggers just speaking for ourselves and who make no money or get anything in kind from blogging.

      • December 15, 2011 at 4:20 pm
        manuelbuencamino

        Kala ko astro turf ay yung buhok ni Donald Trump.

  13. December 14, 2011 at 1:53 pm

    from her fb posts i gather malou reads numbers/stats crunched out by government.

    • December 15, 2011 at 7:47 am
      baycas

      Speaking of numbers…

      Please google “world economic forum 2011 2012” to get the WEF_GCR_Report_2011-12 pdf. One will note that PH is way behind our ASEAN neighbors (save from Cambodia) although we’ve achieved overall improvement since the previous year (from Rank 85/139 in 2010 to Rank 75/142 this year).

      Cambodia and Vietnam (including Bangladesh) are in Stage 1, Factor-driven stage of development.

      Brunei and PH are in Stage 1-2 Transition.

      Indonesia, Malaysia, and Thailand are in Stage 2, Efficiency-driven. Obviously, they are more competitive than us.

      Singapore is a runaway winner at Stage 3, Innovation-driven, and ranked 2/142.

      Up 10 places to 75th, the Philippines posts one of the largest improvements in this year’s rankings. The vast majority of individual indicators composing the GCI improve, sometimes markedly. Yet the challenges are many, especially in the areas at the foundation of any competitive economy, even at an early stage of development.

      The quality of the country’s public institutions continues to be assessed as poor: the Philippines ranks beyond the 100 mark on each of the 16 related indicators. Issues of corruption and physical security appear particularly acute (127th and 117th, respectively). The state of its infrastructure is improving marginally, but not nearly fast enough to meet the needs of the business sector. The country ranks a mediocre 113th for the overall state of its infrastructure, with particularly low marks for the quality of its seaport (123rd) and airport infrastructure (115th). Finally, despite an enrollment rate of around 90 percent, primary education is characterized by low-quality standards (110th). Against such weaknesses, the macroeconomic situation of the Philippines is more positive: the country is up 14 places to 54th in the macroeconomic environment pillar, thanks to slightly lower public deficit and debt, an improved country credit rating, and inflation that remains under control.

      Comparative scores from countries in the first 2 stages of development as regards:

      Judicial Independence
      Brunei – 4.8
      Vietnam – 3.6
      Bangladesh – 3.2
      Cambodia – 3.1
      PH – 2.9

      Efficiency of legal framework in settling disputes
      Brunei – 4.4
      Cambodia – 3.9
      Vietnam – 3.7
      Bangladesh – 3.1
      PH – 2.9

      Efficiency of legal framework in challenging regulations
      Cambodia – 4.0
      Brunei – 3.9
      Vietnam – 3.6
      Bangladesh – 3.3
      PH – 2.8

  14. December 14, 2011 at 4:29 pm
    ricelander

    Reading the complaint, it seems to me any competent lawyer could take Corona’s defense— with eyes closed.

  15. December 14, 2011 at 4:49 pm

    ricelander! been wondering nga who’ll be leading his defense. sana hindi uugod-ugod. sana someone young and brash like alan paguia, para masaya :)

    • December 14, 2011 at 5:12 pm
      manuelbuencamino

      Baka estelito mendoza. he specializes in defending the right people.

      • December 14, 2011 at 5:14 pm

        haha corona wouldnt be so dumb

    • December 14, 2011 at 8:16 pm
      ricelander

      Si Estelito Mendoza nga yata.

      Interesado ako, who will lead the walkout hahaha!

  16. December 14, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    di ba parang negative na ang dating ni estelito these days, too many kuwentos about how lakas he has been with supreme court since marcos times. as for a walkout, let them who dare be suspect of a cover-up :)

    • December 15, 2011 at 4:10 pm
      manuelbuencamino

      “too many kuwentos about how lakas he has been with supreme court since marcos times.”

      That only goes to prove that many of the justices are corrupt and should be likewise impeached.

  17. December 14, 2011 at 10:37 pm
    Bert

    Reading the complaint, it seems to me that any smart lawyer would know that taking Corona’s defense would be an exercise in futility given that the senators/jurors will decide this impeachment case according to the wishes of the vast majority of the the Filipino voters who will vote on election days, :).

  18. December 14, 2011 at 10:45 pm
    Bert

    Estong Mendoza is smart and so used to handling winning cases I think he will avoid defending Corona in this impeachment hearing like a plague. My 2-cents.

  19. December 15, 2011 at 5:18 am
    Manuel C. Diaz

    The Conjuancos; already cashed out Hda Luisita. The Land Bank can foreclose Hda Luisita and the Conjuancos are laughing sa matuwid na da-an pa puntang banko. The big loser is again Juan Makitid ang utak.Ramon Ang of San Miguel was also victimized if I am not mistaken Ramon Ang deposited one billion pesos to buy Hda Luisita. Will the Conjuancos return the money or will they hire a lawyer to slug it out in Court than pay back the one billion pesos advance of the Bright Boy of San Miguel Ramon Ang. It appears that as the tagalog say goes “naisahan din ang matsing”.

  20. December 15, 2011 at 7:49 am
    baycas

    The Global Competitiveness Reports (World Economic Forum) on the poor assessment of our public institutions particularly in three areas: Judicial Independence (JI), Efficiency of legal framework in settling disputes (DISP), and Efficiency of legal framework in challenging regulations (REG)…

    JI
    2010-2011 – Rank 111 out of 139 countries, Score 2.8 over 7
    2011-2012 – 102 over 142, 2.9 over 7

    DISP
    2010-2011 – 122 over 139, 2.8 over 7
    2011-2012 – 115 over 142, 2.9 over 7

    REG
    2010-2011 – 116 over 139, 2.8 over 7
    2011-2012 – 118 over 142, 2.8 over 7

    The scores in the three areas are actually the worst in Southeast Asia (including Bangladesh; Laos and Myanmar not included in the report).

    The Judicial Independence score is measured by the question, “To what extent is the judiciary in your country independent from influences of members of government, citizens, or firms? [1 = heavily influenced; 7 = entirely independent]”

  21. December 15, 2011 at 7:50 am
    baycas

    The Financial Development Report (World Economic Forum) country comparison as regards Judicial Independence (Brunei, Cambodia, Laos, and Myanmar not included in the report):

    2009
    Singapore, Rank 15 over 55 countries, Score 5.79 over 7
    Malaysia, 28, 4.21
    Thailand, 29, 4.20
    Indonesia, 38, 3.83
    Vietnam, 39, 3.79
    Bangladesh, 44, 3.48
    Philippines, 47, 3.14

    2010
    Singapore, Rank 16 over 57 countries, Score 5.64 over 7
    Malaysia, 28, 4.34
    Thailand, 30, 4.32
    Vietnam, 36, 3.87
    Indonesia, 38, 3.80
    Bangladesh, 47, 3.39
    Philippines, 51, 2.84

    2011
    Singapore, Rank 15 over 60 countries, Score 5.64 over 7
    Malaysia, 28, 4.34
    Thailand, 31, 4.20
    Indonesia, 44, 3.60
    Vietnam, 45, 3.60
    Bangladesh, 50, 3.22
    Philippines, 52, 2.95

  22. December 15, 2011 at 7:51 am
    baycas

    The Financial Development Index
    PHILIPPINES

    Year 2010 – 50
    Year 2011 – 44
    Index = 3.13
    Change = +0.17

    The Philippines (44th) improves significantly over the past year, moving up an impressive six spots in the Index. Financial intermediation remains an area of strength for the Philippines as its non-banking financial services (20th) and financial markets (33rd) continue to develop. Specifically, the country has a relative advantage in areas such as securitization (5th), M&A activity (25th), and derivatives markets (25th). Its business environment (55th) and financial access (50th), however, continue to hinder its development. A weak business environment is the result of a lack of infrastructure (53rd) and an extremely high cost of doing business (60th). Other impediments include limitations in financial access in areas such as foreign direct investment (48th) and the total number of ATMs (45th).

    From http://www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_FinancialDevelopmentReport_2011.pdf

  23. December 15, 2011 at 1:14 pm
    jojie

    mb@ since an impeachment trial is a political case, conviction will depend on political alliance. Does Pinoy has the political numbers at this time? I think the lower chamber has shown he can muster enough votes even if Corona gets a super-expert lawyer like E. Mendoza.

    • December 15, 2011 at 4:18 pm
      manuelbuencamino

      jojie,

      The senators kasi have an option of abstaining. YES votes are the basis of impeachment. Thus ABSTAIN votes count as a NO vote.

      A senator who sells his vote can choose to ABSTAIN and he will get to enjoy his bribe money at no political cost. So ang tanong, “sino sa mga senador ang hindi mabibili?”

      Lusot si Corona with 1/3 of the Senate voting Abstain or NO.

      • December 16, 2011 at 1:54 am
        GabbyD

        really? abstain is no? because the denominator contains all congressmen, including those that say abstain…. wow… thats dumb. whats the logic…?

        • December 16, 2011 at 6:06 pm
          manuelbuencamino

          Yes Gabby. Kasi the Constitution says 2/3 or maybe 3/4 of all senators have to vote YES to impeach. 16 YES votes ang threshold. So an abstention would count as a NO.

          Doon naman sa Batasan the Constitution says that if 1/3 of all congressmen sign the impeachment complaint pwede na ipadala sa senado. The threshold (1/3) is lower.

          • December 17, 2011 at 4:17 am
            GabbyD

            my point is that interpretation goes against the logic of abstain. when one abstains, you not only take them out of the numerator, but also the denominator.

            so when a SC judge abstains, that also makes the denominaotr smaller (from 14 to 13).

            what you saying is that the denominator stays the same, and the abstain is a no.

            if so, thats f_ked up.

  24. December 16, 2011 at 8:43 am
    ricelander

    Angela, it seems indeed it is all about the Hacienda Luisita. What do you think?

    http://www.tribuneonline.org/headlines/20111216hed1.html

    Excerpt:

    “From the time of (President Ramon) Magsasay, the hacienda land was never lost. When Martial Law came, we still did not lose our land. GMA (Gloria Arroyo) and Cory had a fight during GMA’s presidency, we Cojuangcos still did not lose our land. Now that that you (Noynoy) are president, we lose the hacienda!”, the Tribune source quoted an elderly Cojuangco as he berated Aquino in the vernacular.

    • December 16, 2011 at 3:03 pm

      ricelander :) i’ve been told, in this thread and on facebook, that the connection b/w corona impeachment and hacienda luisita is “a stretch” and “farfetched”. i would love to be proven wrong, and we will see soon enough. that quote makes me bristle, of course, i detest the sense of entitlement. bakit sila lang. i come from a family whose lands, much much much smaller, acquired by my grandparents thru sariling sikap, were “reformed”, just like that, so nakaka-offend. sana that whole report isn’t true, haha.

  25. December 16, 2011 at 5:36 pm
    Bert

    “From the time of (President Ramon) Magsasay, the hacienda land was never lost. When Martial Law came, we still did not lose our land. GMA (Gloria Arroyo) and Cory had a fight during GMA’s presidency, we Cojuangcos still did not lose our land. Now that that you (Noynoy) are president, we lose the hacienda!”, the Tribune source quoted an elderly Cojuangco as he berated Aquino in the vernacular.”—from the post above by ricelander

    Aren’t we glad Noynoy just let the course of justice for the people ran its path without his intervention? Iyan ang daang matuwid, kapag sa kapakanan ng taong-bayan, walang kama-kamag-anak.

    Therefore, this impeachment proceeding has nothing to do with Hacienda Luisita, ‘di ba?

    • December 16, 2011 at 6:11 pm
      manuelbuencamino

      Bert,

      Nahuli mo yun flaw sa logic ng report sa Tribune!

    • December 16, 2011 at 6:19 pm

      agree with bert. if the trib story is correct, the family is up in arms against pnoy precisely because he supposedly angered the sc justices. that makes pnoy a good guy.

      which means that the trib theory is that a new sc will reverse the luisita decision. let’s say that’s not so far-fetched. but it certainly is playing ball the hard way, knowing that you need 2/3 of the senate to convict. perhaps a better theory is that pnoy is running impeachment to lose. but if so, why?

      • December 16, 2011 at 6:22 pm

        shades of a second-envelope fiasco?

Leave a Reply

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

twitter

follow @stuartsantiago on twitter
  • © Angela Stuart-Santiago