spot_img
28 C
Philippines
Thursday, March 28, 2024

Failing to understand justice

- Advertisement -

When the Committee on Justice of the House of Representatives dismissed the complaint filed against the chairman of the Commission on Elections, Andres Bautista, on the basis of technicality, that allegedly the complaint “was not sufficient in form and substance,” those who voted for its dismissal exhibited their complete ignorance. They forgot that any decision they would take merely partakes of a committee resolution, meaning that the leftover dreg of the Noynoy administration could be suspended or continue to exercise his powers the same way he did when he served as kingpin of the Gestapo-like agency that calls itself the “Presidential Commission on Good Government.”

There was hypocrisy, much that the ground for which the complaint was dismissed alleged that it was “insufficient in form and substance.” The public is crying foul because it should be in the trial of the case where the rudiments and strictness of the law should be observed, with the judge having in mind that an accused is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. In fact, dismissal for lack of verification only applies when there is a clear refusal or defiance to not have the complaint verified. The body that dismissed the complaint is not even a court but a mere committee, tasked not to determine the offense committed but to know the truth so that it could be elevated to the Chamber acting on its plenary power to remove officials impeachable under the Constitution.

In this case, the Committee on Justice merely substitutes the role of the prosecutor. When it whimsically dismissed the complaint, it is an absurdity, for it acted as a syndicated clique of partisan politicians arrogantly overruling the will of the 294 members voted by the people. According to Lorna Kapunan, counsel of the estranged wife of the embattled Comelec chairman, the issue of form and substance should be decided by “Congress exercising its plenary power,” and not by a handful of bigoted and partisan hypocrites.

If only they understand what they did in dismissing the complaint, they would realize how illogical and stupid they are. None or lack of verification is not fatal that its dismissal is merely considered one of technicality. In this case, how could the members of the Committee on Justice, except for Congresswoman Gwendolyn Garcia of Cebu and Kabayan Party-list Congressman Harry Roque, vote to prevent the verification of the complaint, and then proceeded to vote for its dismissal for insufficiency in form and substance? In that, one could see the pattern how the members of the opposition and some of their cohorts in the ruling party criminally railroaded the procedure to ensure the dismissal of the complaint.

It was ludicrous, for practically the Committee on Justice acted as though it represents the entire members of Congress or Congress itself which alone has the plenary power to decide serious charges of corruption, unexplained wealth, and bribery which Andres Bautista now faces. The Committee should have acted liberally to allow the amendment to prevent a miscarriage of justice. Rather, the members acted with malice to stall the filing of impeachment case against that abominable leftover dreg of the Noynoy Aquino administration. As VACC chairman Dante Jimenez would put it: “The verification required in a complaint is merely a formal requirement and can never be used to thwart substantial justice.”

- Advertisement -

Besides, the members of the Committee on Justice should have known that their role is not to determine the guilt of the accused, for that belongs to the proper judicial court but to know the truth why this fellow virtually made a rag of our electoral system by contracting out the counting to a foreign company while hooting that the last election was fair, honest, clean and democratic. It is only during the impeachment trial, with Congress exercising its plenary powers to either convict or acquit where doubts should be resolved in favor of the accused, or in Latin, “In dubiis reus ist absolvendus” applies, but not on the question of verification.

Moreover, since impeachment cases are political in nature, it is not about the “punctilio” of what the law says but more of knowing the truth. The object is to seek the truth than to punish the offender so as to maintain the credibility of the government. It is higher than merely certifying a committee resolution where the weighing of evidence is beyond the requirement of prima facie evidence. The proceeding serves to gauge the feeling of the people towards their government. Hence, when the committee contemptuously junked the complaint, it was one big blow to our justice system much it is evident that once again politics has triumphed over injustice.

In countries with a high degree of moral decency and honesty, public officials no longer wait for somebody to file an impeachment case against them. They readily resign not for the fact that they are admitting to any involvement but for the fact that they no longer have the trust of the people. The loss of confidence is something that he could not defend in any court of law. It is this practice where the ruling party in parliamentary governments automatically resign once they lose the vote of the majority or suffers loss of confidence as they would put it.

Here, this holdover from the hypocritical regime clings to his post despite the fact that the accusation against him is so serious involving not only for culpable violation of the constitution and graft and corruption, but one of treason for collaborating with Smartmatic, a company rumored as a front of the CIA, in rigging the last election which saw the election of an obscure and mediocre widow whom many believe was cheated into office as our alleged vice president by the computer machines contracted by Bautista. The estranged wife even presented evidence that he received commission from the law firm of Smartmatic, headed by Attorney Nilo Divina. 

rpkapunan@gmail.com

- Advertisement -

LATEST NEWS

Popular Articles