menu Menu
Get the mayors at all costs
By mlq3 Posted in Events Mode on May 4, 2007 140 Comments 2 min read
A blunder worse than a crime Previous Calm before the storm Next

Jess Robredo of Naga City suspended on the basis of his questioned citizenship. Sounds familiar? The Comelec as a whole had dismissed the case; now a part of the whole, four years later, decides to suspend him on that flimsy basis, anyway.

The latest is that Makati City Hall is under siege as the suspension of Jejomar Binay has been ordered. Sounds familiar?

Update: things subsided by 1:30 AM, Saturday, but the next round will come on Monday.

Two laws seem to be in conflict here.

Republic Act 6770, the Ombudsman Act of 1989:

Section 24. Preventive Suspension. – The Ombudsman or his Deputy may preventively suspend any officer or employee under his authority pending an investigation, if in his judgement the evidence of guilt is strong, and (a) the charge against such officer or employee involves dishonesty, oppression or grave misconduct or neglect in the performance of duty; (b) the charges would warrant removal from the service; or (c) the respondent’s continued stay in office may prejudice the case filed against him.

The preventive suspension shall continue until the case is terminated by the Office of the Ombudsman but not more than six months, without pay, except when the delay in the disposition of the case by the Office of the Ombudsman is due to the fault, negligence or petition of the respondent, in which case the period of such delay shall not be counted in computing the period of suspension herein provided.

Batas Pambansa Blg. 881, the Omnibus Election Code, which says:

Art. 221, Sec. 254 (x) Suspension of elective provincial, city, municipal or barangay officer. – The provisions of law to the contrary notwithstanding during the election period, any public official who suspends, without prior approval of the Commission, any elective provincial, city, municipal or barangay officer, unless said suspension will be for purposes of applying the “Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act” in relation to the suspension and removal of elective officials; in which case the provisions of this section shall be inapplicable.


Previous Next

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. GMA better be careful. An all-out assault on Binay this close to the election may just succeed in galvanizing public support for him in Makati (ironically, even those who consider him corrupt are expressing support for him), and possibly give the pent-up disgust with this regime a focal point and an outlet.

  2. It’s time the rule of law must prevail. If Binay is innocent, he should face it and vindicate himself in due process. The days of untouchables and sacred cows must end. This is one great opportunity for PGMA to exercise real political will as non-reelectionist president.

    Enough of these knee-jerk mob action to obstruct justice!

  3. I believe this time the rule of law must prevail. If there is pending charges against Mayor Binay and preventive suspension is part of the process, then it must be enforced and I hope the authorities responsible as I gather the DILG, would not be selective as to whom the bell tolls, it must go after all the parties without regards to their political sides. Otherwise, if the opposition are the only ones serve this “rule of the law”, then again the motives will be ‘suspects’ now that election upcoming.

  4. it’s robREDO, i believe.

    or were you hoping someone would point it out, so you could say something about the need to REDO the comelec =)

    kelan ka punta dito?

  5. vic, selective enforcement is improper, immoral, illegal and unjust but it does not detract from the culpability of the accused, if that is what the evidence shows. If Binay is guilty of the crimes he is accused of, he should not be allowed to escape punishment by crying “political persecution” (the classic excuse of politicians on the wrong side of the law). Of course, justice must also be meted out against the “selective enforcer”. But that is a separate and altogether distinct matter.

  6. Does who are not familiar with Philippine laws should be careful in their speculations. You might not know what you are talking about.

  7. bencard,

    “It’s time the rule of law must prevai’l”. well and good.

    but the timing? it’s all b.s. politics!

  8. It’s just a matter of time when rule of law will catch up with you, Mrs. Arroyo.

    “The days of untouchables and sacred cows must end” somehow.

  9. It’s time the rule of law must prevail. If Binay is innocent, he should face it and vindicate himself in due process. The days of untouchables and sacred cows must end.

    Rule of Law? Garcillano was the test case. And under Arroyo’s rule of law, he’s considered innocent. Eh paano pa kaya si GMA?

  10. The laws mentioned are clear, unambiguous, fair, and precisely designed to prevent political persecution, especially during election period.

    First, suspension of elective officials is generally prohibited during election period. This is to prevent the dirty tricks of trying to seek the suspension of those in office during election. The only exception here is when the charges involve graft and corruption. Needless to say, protecting the coffers of State is paramount.

    Secondly, in cases falling under the exception, the power to suspend BELONGS, anyway, to a nonpartisan independent apolitical body. This prevents the political branches from laying a hand in the process.

    Thirdly, the suspension must be founded upon a STRONG evidence of guilt. This prevents indiscriminate and malicious fabrication of charges.

    And lastly, the affected party can always resort to judicial review of the suspension order. This is to prevent any possible abuse of discretion on the part of the suspending officer.

    Of course, the foregoing are not foolproof. But this appears to be the best that the law can be. Can’t blame the law for the chicanery of those who are supposed to implement them.

  11. Bencard,

    Pakiramdam ko ay parang natapilok ka yata.

    “If Binay is innocent, he should face it and vindicate himself in due process.”

    Medyo lugi yata sa Binay if he “should” vindicate himself if he is innocent.

  12. wiretapping kay cory plus itong suspensyon kay jejomar binay, parang sakto sa umagahang Tinapay at Kape (if you drink one in the AM).

    fire in the hole!

  13. Justice League,baliktad nga ata. kung inosente si binay, dapat patunayan ng mga nagaakusa sa kanya na makatotohanan ang mga akusasyon nila. pero di ba dapat i-assume na inosente si binay? so kahit guilty pa siya, ang dapat may patunayan ay yun paring nagaakusa.

  14. Don’t give me any of your “rule of law,” Bencard, while GMA coddles the likes of Raul “P10,000 for 12-0 Team Unity” Gonzalez. Binay’s guilt still needs to be established; Gonzalez’s crime is out in the open for all to see–he doesn’t even bother to deny it. But guess who is going to be prosecuted?

  15. Todits,

    If Binay is guilty and the accusers have to prove Binay’s guilt, then that would be fair as far as the courts are concerned.

    But if Binay is innocent and he “should” vindicate himself in due process; then that appears unfair.

    Kaya nga sabi ko ay medyo lugi yata si Binay.

  16. Guys,

    Easy lang kayo kay Bencard, wag nyo naman masyado anuhin… inaano nyo masyado e…

    To those who dont know it, he’s a retired lawyer who’s now living in Boston, so he’s so out of touch with the reality here, hence his ridiculous comments…

  17. Galit na agalit kayo kay GMA for staying that long in Malacanang. Pero hindi nyo nakikita that the Binays has been holding on to Makati for soooooooooooo long na. Galit ana galit kayo na yumayaman si GMA sa pwesto. Pero si Binay sino at magkano ba ang worth nya before becoming a Mayor of Makati? Ayaw nyo corruption ni Mike A. Pero OK lang ba kung si Binay ang mangurakot?

    Come to think of it? Sino ba talaga ang masisira ng husto sa pag serve ng supension kay Binay at the gheight of an election? Di ang admin at hindi si Binay. Patunay lang that Mrs Arroyo is setting aside politics and doesn’t care about the backlash in favor of rule of law.

    In case of Garcillano, faced the probe he resigned from his position. But with the absence of witnesess and evidences, he just can not be convicted. Even Mike Aroyo with all the allegations of corruption can not really be convicted all the allegations are well substanstiated And all the accusers shoudl just stop talking but really work hard on gathering solid evidence against him.

  18. Rego,

    We have the right to be galit na galit kay GMA, just like lab na lab mo sya, pati na si Mike Arroyo and Virgilio Garcillano. You have to respect our opinion just as we respect yours.

    It’s not like there are no compelling evidence to prove their guilt, it’s just that the opposition has been very lousy with the job.

    I couldn’t care less about Binay, he’s screwing only Makati. Your Gloria Arroyo is screwing the whole nation and she’s still clinging to her throne in Malacanang.

    If only she had even an ounce of delicadeza, this issue would have been long done and over with.

  19. But the word ‘delicadeza’, last i heard, was already dropped from the Filipino’s vocabulary. Hence the “Delicadeza, what?” attitude from Gloria Arroyo, Ben Abalos and the administration’s sickest clown — Raul Gonzales.

  20. justice league, if Binay is “innocent”. the only way to vidicate himself is through the court, where he stands accused, and not on street demonstrations in imitation of “people power”. Both the issues of guilt and innocence have yet to be proven in accordance with “due process”.

    Those who seek to justify Binay in this blog should talk to Binay’s lawyer and “coach” him how to defend his client. Maybe they can help absolve Binay by citing issues against PGMA and her administration.

  21. galing. ang link ni mlq3 tungkol kay robredo ay sa isang blog na ang source ay isang text message. wow. ako rin nakatanggap ako ngtext na nahanap na raw ang golden buddha ni macoy duon sa pangalawang pier ng jones bridge.

  22. gusto kong matawa ngayon kaya binasa ko muna ang sinulat ni brawner ukol kay g. jesse robredo (may kopya sa blog ni g. willy prilles, jr….

    biruin mo limang termino na palang Chinese ang alkalde ng naga!

  23. Bencard,

    I respectfully disagree.

    As far as the article linked above is concerned, what is being served to Binay is a “preventive suspension” by the Ombudsman (which is certainly not a court) so an administrative complaint filed against him can be further “investigated” without him being able to exert “undue influence” for a favorable outcome towards himself.

    If after that the “complaint” does not progress (there is always that possiblity) on its own merit, I doubt Binay will have anything to face in “court”. How then can he vindicate himself (if he is innocent) by your idea?

    “Both the issues of guilt and innocence have yet to be proven in accordance with “due process”.”

    Well I certainly didn’t expect someone like you to tag the line that innocence has to be proven in accordance with due process.

    Nevertheless, that is your opinion but I have a different one and I will leave it at that.

  24. Candidate Jojo Villafuerte is a lucky guy. He takes over Naga City Hall without a fair fight. T.K.O. victory courtesy of partisan Comelec commissionaires. Only in the Philippines. BTW, Malacanang boy Manny Pukyaw has a questionable residency issue. Can the Comelec do same T.K.O. ruling?

  25. Dilangalen guilty of ballot snatching in ’04 polls-Comelec

    Why only now?

  26. Dilangalen guilty of ballot snatching in ’04 polls-Comelec

    Why only now? How about Virgilio Garcillano? Is he guilty of election fraud too?

  27. justice league, i stand corrected on the current status of the (case(s), although I understand his “preventive suspension” this time is based on yet another charge of corruption, among others, before the ombudsman. In any event, assuming a formal indictment is lodged in a court of law (a strong likelihood being that a suspension has already been served) Binay will have to either admit or deny his guilt and if the prosecution presents admissible evidence of guilt, Binay has to rebut that by counter-evidence of innocence, or else run the risk of being convicted.

    Athough the presumption of innocence is alive and well in our justice system and that the burden of proof (beyond reasonable doubt) is on the prosecution, yet, for all practical purposes (political, in particular) a cloud of doubt has been created on Binay’s integrity just by being charged with with the offenses he is alleged to have committed. What better opportunity for him to “vindicate” himself than in a court of law, rather than on the media or the street?

  28. Ignacio Binay said,

    “This is strictly between the Ombudsman and Mayor Binay.”

  29. Bencard,

    Well I’m not really that sure of “counter-evidence of innocence” but maybe its just a semantics thing.

    Though we cannot force Binay to adopt a particular tactic or strategy for how he will defend himself (he’s a lawyer!) whether that be in or out of court; I’d agree as I see that there is “no better” opportunity for him to vindicate himself than in a court of law.

    But it will be his choice if he decides on a “lesser” method for vindication and he can freely do so at his own credit or peril.

  30. What better opportunity for GMA to “vindicate” herself than in the impeachement court, rather than on the media or the street?

  31. A cut-and-paste from Inquirer on Robredo/Comelec:

    MANILA, Philippines —

    ..
    In a resolution by its First Division, Comelec said Robredo, son of Chinese parents, failed to “perform any act showing his intention to elect Filipino citizenship” even after reaching the legal age 31 years ago. It also ordered Vice Mayor Gabriel Bornado to assume the mayoralty post as mandated by the Local Government Code.
    ..
    The Comelec’s First Division acted on the complaint of Jojo Villafuerte, Robredo’s opponent in this month’s election. … In a statement, Senator Pimentel called the Comelec decision “ridiculous and illogical” because he has been elected mayor of Naga City four times by his constituents. The opposition senator said Comelec decision is not just “a travesty of justice,” but also “an oppressive act against the residents of Naga City who elected him.”

  32. Mayor Robredo should be able to produce a passport as proof of Filipino citizenship, one would think.

  33. . . . with the absence of witnesses and evidences, (former Comelec Commissioner Garcillano of the Garci tapes fame) just can not be convicted. Even (First Gentleman) Mike Aroyo with all the allegations of corruption can not really be convicted . . . And all the accusers should just stop talking but really work hard on gathering solid evidence against him. – Rego

    Yet, who should “work hard on gathering solid evidence against” the likes of Garci, Joc Joc Bolante, or on such serious matters as the extra-judicial killings of journalists and militant opposition or the new exposé on the “PNCC Radstock deal” that appear to involve acts or omissions of public officials, employees, offices or agencies”?

    The Philippine Constitution is clear on how the “rule of law” should be enforced in this regard.

    Article XI, Section 13 (1) provides that the Office of the Ombudsman shall have, among others, the powers, functions, and duties to “investigate on its own” any act or omission of any public official, employee, office or agency, “when such act or omission appears to be illegal, unjust, improper, or inefficient.”

    Remember for instance that in the Info Tech case, Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez shirked her above duty even as she ignored the findings of the Supreme Court citing, among other things, the “reckless disregard of (Comelec’s) own bidding rules and procedure” in the case “in clear violation of law and jurisprudence”; instead, her office absolved the Comelec officials led by Chairman Benjamin Abalos from the anomalous P1.3 billion poll automation contract with Mega Pacific?

    Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez, whose constitutional office has yet to prove as a pillar in the pursuit of “rule of law” was willing to shame her authority both as the Ombudsman and as an officer of the court by feigning an unconventional definition of “probable cause” in the Info Tech case in the same callous manner the House in the impeachment cases has dealt with the “Garci tapes.”

    The egregious nonfeasance of Ombudsman Gutierrez is a distressing contrast with the spirited quest of the rule of law by US Special Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald against high-level White House adviser Scooter Libby. Fitzgerald’s tenacity resulted in Libby’s conviction for obstructing justice and lying to FBI agents then investigating the leak of CIA operative Valerie Plame’s identity.

    Libby now faces up to 25 years in prison. On the other hand, Garcillano, let off scot-free, is today seeking, quite tauntingly, a congressional seat while those Comelec officials whom the Supreme Court has found to have violated the law and jurisprudence remain at the helm of a critical electoral exercise for the survival of the body polity.

    Rule of law and legitimate representation are of the essence of republicanism. Without one or the other, there is failure of democracy.

  34. My classmate swears up and down that he is Filipino. And in my eyes, he is. Born in the Philippines, grew up in the streets of Binondo, college degree from Ateneo/Loyola Heights plus U-Chicago MBA…. except for the detail that he flies to Thailand, the US, Bangladesh, Hongkong, Beijing with his Taiwan passport.

  35. In a statement, Senator Pimentel called the Comelec decision “ridiculous and illogical” because he has been elected mayor of Naga City four times by his constituents. The opposition senator said Comelec decision is not just “a travesty of justice,” but also “an oppressive act against the residents of Naga City who elected him.”

    Did the trust given him by the Naguenos absolve him from his violation of the law thru misrepresentation?

    When he was reelected three times, did the people know his citizenship?

    Pimentel said it is an oppressive act against the residents of Naga but what about the trust betrayed by the mayor in hiding his citizenship and holding on to his Taiwanese passport.

  36. The “Taiwanese passport” thing is a low blow. I wonder where UPn Student got that info.

    The only passport that Mayor Robredo carries is one issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs. And it is of the Philippine government, not of Taiwan.

    “Why do we say that Robredo is a Filipino citizen? Let us count the ways: His birth certificate states that he is a Filipino citizen and that his parents are both Filipino citizens; his father’s birth certificate states that he (the father) is a Filipino citizen. His grandfather’s death certificate states that he (the grandfather) is a Filipino citizen. Jesse and his father carry Philippine passports. Since these are government official documents, the presumption must be that Robredo is indeed a Filipino. Moreover, Robredo has voted in Philippine elections ever since he reached the age of majority — long before he entered politics. And if it makes any difference, he never studied in a Chinese school, doesn’t speak Chinese, and has never even visited China. He was allowed to run five times, petitions for his disqualification having been denied all along. Except this time around.” — “The Brawner Doctrine,” Winnie Monsod’s column in yesterday’s issue of the Inquirer.

  37. Has anyone ever checked yet if Mike Arroyo is a Filipino citizen? If not, then having married an alien, it is legally possible that GMA may not be a Filipino citizen if by some act or omission she may have renounced her Filipino citizenship.

  38. according to brawner…as the burden of proof lies on the claimant [paa v. chan 128 Phil. 815 (1967)], jesse robredo failed to substantiate his claim that his father is a Filipino citizen and that he is thereby also a Filipino citizen.

    granting jesse robredo’s father is an alien and his mother a Filipino citizen:

    the Implied Election Doctrine on citizenship may not apply in jesse’s case and brawner, again, may have been right in citing Vicente Ching’s case…

    Can a legitimate child born under the 1935 Constitution of a Filipino mother and an alien father validly elect Philippine citizenship fourteen (14) years after he has reached the age of majority? This is the question sought to be resolved in the present case involving the application for admission to the Philippine Bar of Vicente D. Ching.

    the supreme court denied mr. ching’s application as he is not a Filipino citizen…

    The Court, like the OSG, is sympathetic with the plight of Ching. However, even if we consider the special circumstances in the life of Ching like his having lived in the Philippines all his life and his consistent belief that he is a Filipino, controlling statutes and jurisprudence constrain us to disagree with the recommendation of the OSG. Consequently, we hold that Ching failed to validly elect Philippine citizenship. The span of fourteen (14) years that lapsed from the time he reached the age of majority until he finally expressed his intention to elect Philippine citizenship is clearly way beyond the contemplation of the requirement of electing “upon reaching the age of majority.” Moreover, Ching has offered no reason why he delayed his election of Philippine citizenship. The prescribed procedure in electing Philippine citizenship is certainly not a tedious and painstaking process. All that is required of the elector is to execute an affidavit of election of Philippine citizenship and, thereafter, file the same with the nearest civil registry. Ching’s unreasonable and unexplained delay in making his election cannot be simply glossed over.

    Philippine citizenship can never be treated like a commodity that can be claimed when needed and suppressed when convenient. 20 One who is privileged to elect Philippine citizenship has only an inchoate right to such citizenship. As such, he should avail of the right with fervor, enthusiasm and promptitude. Sadly, in this case, Ching slept on his opportunity to elect Philippine citizenship and, as a result. This golden privilege slipped away from his grasp.

    IN VIEW OF THE FOREGOING, the Court Resolves to DENY Vicente D. Ching’s application for admission to the Philippine Bar.

    considering the number of times his citizenship was put to question and the number of years that has lapsed, the ousted mayor jesse robredo may have slept on the opportunity to clear things out. yes, the villafuertes may be guilty of political harassment but certain obligations as a Filipino citizen must be fulfilled. perhaps this is an eye-opener to him and this will pave the way to thresh out once and for all his status, whether he is an alien or not.

    it’s sad that this has happened considering the apparent stellar performance of a public official and a political opponent’s desire to win at all cost even by mere technicality. we await jesse’s final fate once the supreme court is petitioned re: this brawner doctrine.

    could it be that jesse’s bright mind (with possible clairvoyance) anticipated such comelec ruling or is jesse acknowledging his apparent neglect (on his citizenship) that’s why he fielded in his wife as mayoral candidate in Naga???

    —–
    quotes taken from:
    BAR MATTER No. 914 October 1, 1999
    RE: APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION TO THE PHILIPPINE BAR,
    vs.
    VICENTE D. CHING, applicant.

  39. rego :

    Galit na agalit kayo kay GMA for staying that long in Malacanang. Pero hindi nyo nakikita that the Binays has been holding on to Makati for soooooooooooo long na.

    was there ever a time na ninakaw ba ni binay ang election ala arroyo? we know arroyo and garci (and his merry men at the comelec and the military), but not once have you asked for her resignation.

  40. Galit ana galit kayo na yumayaman si GMA sa pwesto. Pero si Binay sino at magkano ba ang worth nya before becoming a Mayor of Makati? Ayaw nyo corruption ni Mike A. Pero OK lang ba kung si Binay ang mangurakot?

    the problem with the binay case is that the last time the admin tried to oust binay in 2006, arroyo’s allies and critics in the media were united in their view na the admin na hindi credible ang evidence ng admin.. and perennial loser and binay hater brillantes is not exactly the most credible witness out there (altho malaki ang tiwala ng admin sa kanya at that time)

    From conrad de quiros (“Shameless in Manila”):

    I heard the exchange between Binay and Interior Secretary Ronaldo Puno last Tuesday night, during the first day of Binay’s suspension, and nothing could be more damning for government. To say that Binay reduced Puno to fumbling inarticulateness is to say Gonzalez is not always in the full possession of his senses: It is the understatement of the year. After Binay repeatedly challenged Puno to show proof of a ghost employee under his watch, indeed after demanding to know what kind of investigation was conducted for Puno to conclude wrongdoing on Binay’s part, Puno tried to exculpate himself by blaming his bosses for the crime. He wasn’t the one who fired Binay, he said at length, Malacañang did.

    This was after one public official after another had been reciting like a mantra that there was nothing “political” about the suspension of Binay. The dismissal of a local official signed by the executive secretary and not by the secretary of the DILG—an astonishing usurpation of authority—is not political? The attempt to dismiss a duly elected official who happens to be a thorn in Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s side by GMA herself—by Puno’s own suggestion—is not political?

    =======

    From Max Soliven:

    http://www.politicaljunkie.blogspot.com/2006/10/administration-must-be-reading-max.html

    “If the DILG and the GMA Government don’t really have the goods on Makati Mayor Jejomar Binay – who “refuses” to be suspended – they’d better “whisper” to the Court of Appeals that it quickly resolve the issue and get Makati City defrosted from its present paralysis. Courts, alas, are like leviathans that move in slow motion and there are many “lawyer’s tricks” to delay or derail cases. Every abogado de campanilla has a lot of Whereas and Wherefores tucked in his or her old kit bag.”

    ======

    more from neal cruz (October 23, 2006):

    But the charge against Binay is that he has “ghost employees.” It is a simple matter of asking the mayor to produce the workers in the city’s payroll and prove that they are warm bodies and not ghosts. Failing that, then he should be declared guilty. There are no documents or evidence relating to the case that he can tamper with. Therefore, there is no need to suspend him and disrupt the delivery of basic services to the people of Makati. In fact, he can still be prosecuted for having ghost employees even while he remains the mayor of Makati.

    Besides, the complainant in the case, perennial losing candidate Bobby Brillante, is not even sure if there are ghost employees and who they are. His complaint only presents the names in the payroll and says that “some of them are ghost employees.” Some of them! A regular court would have thrown the complaint into a waste basket then and there. But Malacañang, without even trying to get the side of Binay, or asking Brillante who these ghost employees were, immediately suspended Binay. That was a denial of due process guaranteed by the Bill of Rights.

    That’s why Binay went to the Court of Appeals. Who are these ghost employees? Let Brillante identify them. Then, presumably, Binay would present them one by one to the investigating body to prove that they are real people, alive and kicking, and not ghosts. If he fails to produce even one of them, then he will be proven guilty.

    But Brillante, until now, has not produced a list of the alleged ghost employees, even though All Saints’ Day is just around the corner. If he is sure of his facts, it is a simple matter of ticking off the names of the ghosts. Why can’t he?

    Because the real purpose of Malacañang is not to identify the ghosts and prove corruption but just to suspend Binay and get him out of the Makati City Hall before the election period ban on suspensions kicks in. The start of the ban is only weeks away. That is why Malacañang is in a hurry.

    =========

    this latest binay accusation seems like another corpus/rosebud/mawanay like caper of faulty intelligence/evidence re lacson’s “billion dollar bank accounts” na inimbestigahan ni blue ribbon cmte chairman joker arroyo (and attack dog barbers) for three years (from 2001-2004).

    Come to think of it? Sino ba talaga ang masisira ng husto sa pag serve ng supension kay Binay at the gheight of an election? Di ang admin at hindi si Binay. Patunay lang that Mrs Arroyo is setting aside politics and doesn’t care about the backlash in favor of rule of law.

    this is a spin only a rabid pro-arroyo idiot can think of.

    In case of Garcillano, faced the probe he resigned from his position. But with the absence of witnesess and evidences, he just can not be convicted. Even Mike Aroyo with all the allegations of corruption can not really be convicted all the allegations are well substanstiated And all the accusers shoudl just stop talking but really work hard on gathering solid evidence against him.

    :rolleyes:

  41. ghost employees abound almost if not in all public offices. why single out only binay, if the intent is not political harassment? kahit nga sa malacanang, sangkatutak ang mga mamayang multo.

    di ba rego?

  42. One proof that there are ghost employees in Makati is to check the withholding taxes paid to the BIR. This was my comment the first time this issue came out.

    The Ombudsman did and showed that there were no remittances of withholding taxes amounting to billions of pesos.

    If this is true, then Binay is guilty of non-payment of taxes. Magbayad siya sa Pilipinas.

    One more thing, if the unpaid withholding taxes include the non-ghost employees, these employees are also robbed of the deductions that they get from their payroll.

    Parang bawas ng bawas sa suweldo mo,hindi naman pala ibinabayad.

    I am wondering if this is same with Social Security contribution.

    Just like withhholding taxes, the employers’ share and the employees’ share should also have been remitted to the Social Security Administration on the quarterly basis or monthly basis depending on the number of the employees.

    Same case, if Binay’s administration fails to remit the said contributions, ghost or non- ghost employees, the legitimate employees would be deprived of their retirement and medicare privileges.

    Ano ang kaibahan niya sa mga unscrupulous employers na bawas lang bawas sa mga empleyado at hindi naman ibinabayad ang mga automatic deductions sa payslip.

    Problema sa atin ang ating partisanship ang nagiging blinders para sabihing inosente ang isang tao dahil sa partido na ating kinaaniban.

  43. DILG’s Marius Corpuz admitted if Binay is reelected then the case against him is washed out.

    Ombudsgirl Merceditas Gutierrez issued the “preventive suspension” a week before an election Binay is expected to win.

    So what was the rush?

    Gutierrez is going to complete her investigation and decide Binay’s guilt or innocence in 6 days and then the electorate will throw out the case anyway.

    But of course no political vendetta here. Gloria has nothing to do with it.

  44. “We have the right to be galit na galit kay GMA, just like lab na lab mo sya, pati na si Mike Arroyo and Virgilio Garcillano. You have to respect our opinion just as we respect yours.”- tagabukid

    Tagbukid,

    No, hindi ko lab na lab si Gloria, si Mike Arroyo, at si Garcillano. I would to have them jailed! Ang sinsabi ko lang, ilabas anng tootong ebindensya para mapakulong sila!

  45. “It’s not like there are no compelling evidence to prove their guilt, it’s just that the opposition has been very lousy with the job.”- tagabukid

    tagabkid,

    so where is the compelling evidence? if you have them, why not bring it to court at nang matapos na ang kagulohang eto!

    And if the oppposition did a lousy job, whom we should blame?

  46. “I couldn’t care less about Binay, he’s screwing only Makati. Your Gloria Arroyo is screwing the whole nation and she’s still clinging to her throne in Malacanang. ” – tagabukid,

    tagabukid,

    so ano ba talaga ang pinaglalaban mo? Corruption in general o focus ka lang kay Gloria?

keyboard_arrow_up