Premature celebration

The big news of course is what is being called a nuanced decision by the Supreme Court on Executive Order 464. What struck me was that news began to circulate at around noon yesterday, and within a few minutes the Palace had a statement -on a decision it technically hadn’t had an opportunity to review, much less properly comment on.Portions of the Executive Order were declared unconstitutional.

As I understand it, the Supreme Court’s decision mandates the following:

1. In terms of the “Question Hour,” which has hardly been used by Congress, the President must approve any appearance by members of the cabinet.

2. For purposes of hearings in aid of legislation, the President can forbid the appearance of heads of department if she asserts and explains that for the heads of department to appear would violate executive privilege or endanger national security. Of course this brings up some interesting possible disputes: not all cabinet members are heads of department, so for non-department heads in the cabinet, can they be required to testify before Congress regardless? Also, the concept of executive privilege has been strengthened by the Court’s decision, even though it’s something vague, not written in the laws, or mentioned in the Constitution.

3. The Court says all other inferior positions, and members of the armed forces, cannot be covered by the Executive Order and therefore, no limits can be imposed by the executive on these officials and government workers appearing before Congress.

4. Some members of Congress are less than satisfied because the decision emphasizes inquiries in aid of legislation but not the oversight powers of Congress, which are even more important.

The decision is definitely a setback for the administration, but leaves room for further fights over interpretation.

In other news:

The Inquirer editorial sums up the Justice Secretary’s recent statement and behavior concerning American servicemen accused of rape: “Loathsome.”

Also, Palace orders implementation of ID system. I’m not against a national ID per se, but the manner in which it is utilized will require vigilance.

My day will be spent in the third and final day of Free Expression in Asian Cyberspace (the blog has comprehensive updates on what was discussed in the various sessions). You can read more in Teeth Maestro, a participant from Pakistan, and PCIJ: session 4 (Great Firewall of China!), and 5 (Sedition, sedition!), and 6 (JV Rufino of explains pressures of the financial kind for online news media), and 7 (Melinda de Jesus’ magnificent remarks).

Spillover from iBlog2 continues from Philippine Commentary and Ellen Tordesillas.

Over the weekend you can catch replays of my interviewing Roby Alampay of SEAPA, Ethan Zuckerman, and the head of, Malaysia’s leading online news source.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Manuel L. Quezon III.

33 thoughts on “Premature celebration

  1. MLQ3, the SC decision is also a a very positive development for me. I read it in the papers yesterday and cant wait to read your entry her to come out. Of course I am expecting you and the opposition to be jubilant about. Because you are starting to reap the result of your hard vigilance. Kudos to you and teh opposition.

    I have a strong feeling that people in the middle ground ( Ms Monsod, Bong Austero) would be very happy with the SC decision. Because this also what we want. To let the issue be coursed to and be debated in the proper forum. There is no need for to oust Mrs Arroyo at all cost, there is no need for people power, there is no need for the nation to self destruct. Mrs Arroyo can be allowed to stay in Malacanang, subject her to a hard labor to push the nation nations economy forward, but peopel should be very vigilant. Bantayan ng husto ang bawat galaw nya. Anytime and everytime she do something illegal or anything that you see you dont like, fiel a case in the proper forum.

    There are so many issue that should be debated and settled in court rather than in the streets. The CPR, SoE, Cha-Cha, the death sentence commutations all shoudl be settled in court. There is one issue that i really wanted the SC to rule. And that is the meddling of the Catholic church on the U.S of artificial birth control. Do they really have the right to impose that on the government.

  2. So the Supreme Court has stopped ‘playing possum’ and finally made a move.

    It is a setback for the administration but as Sir MLQ3 points out, Malacanang had -in minutes, a prepared statement for it.

    What are the odds of that? Or maybe, the Palace has a tap on the Supreme Court, or worst, the Court is has played according to game plan designed by Malacanang.

  3. MLQ3,

    BGen Gudani and Col Balutan should now be in the clear from a legal or technical standpoint as to the legality of their act when they heeded the summons by Senate to appear before a Senate committee. The basis of their defence is the now invalidated EO464 itself or parts of it. Well and good!

    Military law carries distinct provisions pertaining to disobedience by a military officer: an officer may disobey a superior order if the order is IMMORAL, ILLEGAL or UNLAWFUL.

    In sum, they should be exonerated and because the SC has now ruled that the EO464 or parts of it are unconstitutional, therefore unlawful, it is possible for the lawyers of Gudani and Balutan to challenge full blast the military disobedience charge filed by the AFP against these two officers and be done with all this nonsense.

    However, it seems Mike Defensor now claims that BGen Gudani and Col Balutan that the charge today against these two officers are for disobeying their commander in chief! Defensor, an ass-licking lackey of the purest upstart fart category, has absolutely very little clue on how a military organization really operates – and what chain of command really means – so, is hellbent on transforming the two highly decorated and seasoned military officers into military scalawags.

    Disobeying their commander in chief? Whoa! On what moral, legal military grounds is Defensor basing his allegation? Complete, utter load of bullshit! Defensor is DEAD wrong. (Just like when he said a few months ago that he would give instructions to the military to fire on the crowd or some gibberish if it were to be fire for fire scenario… he’s a dimwit cuckoo in his knowledge of the military chain of command!)

    If you remember, poor Gudani and Balutan were merely copied the EO464 by fax by the CSAFP in the wee hours of the morning (on the same day as the scheduled hearing). For a military order to be followed to the letter or a specific order emanating from a commander in chief to the military as an institution to be followed without and military hitch, it must be affirmed and confirmed in a written, explicit military order BY the chief of staff (that’s his job!) invoking no less a part or parts of the military law that concern the order. Without such explicit, written order invoking or citing the pertinent military law, the disobedience charge or disobeying their commander in chief can be truly challenged because if I am to believe what I’ve read so far, General Generoso Senga, Chief of Staff AFP, MERELY faxed a copy of the EO464 in the wee hours of the morning to the office of BGen Gudani on the day of the hearing WITHOUT an explicit, written order to OBEY and FOLLOW a military order which, if you come down to it, was meant for senior and star ranking military officers who, given their stature in the military, are allowed to think over and interpret an order.

    A military officer is bound by military law to obey a direct order by his direct superior. However, if the order is NOT explicit or is vague, an officer could very well interpret it differently and in so doing, could commit an error in his interpretation of the order in which case, the breach of obedience by a military officer could fall directly on the shoulders of his direct superior under the tenet of military command responsibility.

    It is therefore very possible for the defence to call Senga in a court martial to require him to give his own version of why and how an order of his, if an order was indeed given, was breached and to prove that there was a serious flaw in the command transmission of the order. In so doing, Balutan and Gudani may turn the tables around and leave the court with a legal technical victory. Obviously, it would take a great deal of moral courage for members of a court martial jury to adopt this military logic but it is not far-fetched to believe that Gudani and Balutan have solid grounds for their defence. But that is another story…

    PMS chief Mike Defensor is playing Houdini or Walt Disney with the military code of ethics and conduct. He probably thinks his status has given him the right to state and declare pure thrash and inanities pertaining to the military. He has much to learn or to unlearn – he has very little clue on what the military organization is all about and how it operates. He and his so-called commander in chief are re-inventing military traditions to suit a Mickey Mouse or Disneyland type of armed forces rats!

  4. Mike Defensor is Mike defensor and whatever he does and will be doing is just in accordane to his job description. Now if he is breaking the law, then file a case gainst him. Wala naman immunity ang mga cabinet memebres di ba? I remember there is a move to disbar him and Secretary Gonzalez for waht they are saying and doing. I think that shoudl be pursued.

  5. MLQ3,

    I’ve just read that Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s speech before the graduating class of Cavite State University was marred when one of the graduating students, Maria Theresa Pangilinan, a mass communications graduate, unfurled a banner calling for Gloria’s ouster.

    Atta girl! Maria Theresa Pangilinan has got guts, gall and raw courage…

    How I wish there are more young Filipinos with similar courage to defy armed Gloria goons and speak up for what they believe. If there are more young people like Pangilinan, the Philippines can look to a bright future in spite of or despite Gloria’s bogus presidency.

  6. I thought that:

    1. During privilege hour, the president must certify to congress that the “information” the department head has is privileged. If not, then Congress can still “force” the dept head to appear. It’s not the position that shields the executive from congress, it’s the “privileged information”.

    2. In any investigation “in aid of legislation”, congress can “force” anybody to appear except the president himself/herserlf and the SC justices.

    I must have been reading the SC decision with “irrational exuberance”?!

  7. “…Anytime and everytime she do something illegal or anything that you see you dont like, fiel a case in the proper forum.”

    Yeah, like filing an impeachment complaint against her in Congress?

  8. What of the Executive Power “of Control” over executive officers (Sec. 17, Art. VII) and “of Command” over military officers (Sec. 18, Art. VII)?

    These are awesome Executive Powers, don’t they have any weight at all?

    Can these powers of a co-equal be just as easily superseded by the authority to inquire “in aid” of the Power to Make Law?

    Incidentally, why rely on the concept of a “Executive Privilege” as defined by U.S. precedents and law books on the U.S. Constitution?

    I think these citations are irrelevant, inapplicable, since the U.S. Executive does not possess the “Power of Control,” claiming the exercise of “control” over executive officers to be merely part of a nebulous (and often controversial) “Executive Privilege.”

    I suppose a “power” expressly granted cannot be compared to a “privilege” merely implied.

    A “Question Hour” (originally found in the 1973 version) and the meaning of the term “interpellation” (in the 1973 and still in the 1987 version) belong to rules that govern a parliament, a Prime Minister removable by a majority of its membes–not to a presidential system such as ours.

    If the Legislative is now recognized to possess the authority to “summon” (synonymous to “request”?), tantamount to the Power of Control over the “alter ego” of the Executive under the congressional authority to inquire “in aid of legislation,” and to “interpellate,” is there a need for “Sigaw” to shift to parliamentary from presidential?

    The Supreme Court in it decision and the 1987 Constitution say (as in “Question Hour” and “Interpellation”) that we are now–a sort-of half-way parliamentary with officers of an inutile Executive sort-of answerable to whims of a co-equal yet omnipotent Legislative.

    And with the Legislative doing all the “investigation” it can think of, do we still need to have (and spend millions for) the services of a constitutional “investigator,” the Ombudsman?

    Anyway, with the SC decision, instead of wasting their time calling Gudani and the others, why don’t they just “summon” the three members of the Board of Election Canvassers (career officers) of every contested constituency (Lanaos and anywhere) whose right hand thumbmarks and signatures are affixed (several times per page at that) in each of the seven copies (one now with PET) of the certificates of canvass–and compel them to testify or name the mastermind?

    Signatures can easily be faked or forged (ask Lacson or Iggy); but “incontrovertible” THUMBMARKS DO NOT LIE!

    Come to think of it, thumbmarks might be the just be “closing hand” after all.

  9. Domingo,

    The thumb imprint point you raised is indeed very interesting – our police authorities should be able to determine whether those thumb imprints match!!!

    But what if Gloria’s election lackeys change, erase their thumb imprints through plastic surgery of some kind… if Gloria can do the unthinkable – produce a whopping 1,000,000 voting edge by phone over her nearest rival, you can imagine how easy it is for her to have those three election canvassers to go under a tiny surgical knife?

    (Umiiling…) What a government of crooks we’ve got! Bah! Disgusting, revolting bunch of fartheads they all are!

  10. THis just shows how young our constitution is and our system lacking experience to face different scenarios in pushing our society to progress….

    It’s a pitty papalitan na kagad ang ating constitution, balik nanaman tayo sa stone age tsk tsk tsk…

  11. Am not doing the “FVR jump” yet just because the Supreme Court has declared some parts of Gloria’s EO 464 as unconstitutional.

    Am watching for the Supreme Court’s consistency in its next critical decisions. There’s still the matter of the constitutionality of her CPR and her Declaration of a State of Emergency. I hope this is not a one-for-you and one-for-me series of decisions. I’m not popping my champagne yet.

  12. The SC had to make a ruling, no matter how lame. Can you imagine what would happen, if it upheld EO464? People would go to streets clamoring for total change. Even the SC, which we all know have administration cronies, will not be immuned from the peoples anger.

    The palace is way too smart. They know what they are doing. Of course the opposition has to claim victory, but nothing has really changed. We got a couple of bones – that’s just about it.

    But then again, it leaves some doors ajar. It would be up to the opposition to bust them wide open.

    So, it is a premature celebration, indeed.

    OT: Just watched a documentary: Imelda, power, myth, illusion by Ramona S Diaz.

    What a lady! Of course Gloria is no Imelda, but soon Gloria would be in the same boat.

  13. “…Anytime and everytime she do something illegal or anything that you see you dont like, fiel a case in the proper forum.”

    “Yeah, like filing an impeachment complaint against her in Congress?”

    Yes, impeachment should be the only way to remove Mrs Arroyo peacefully. Now if she preventing that to happen. Then the work to do is to address why is the tactics that she is using. If she is using the pork barrel allocation to bribe teh congress men. Then pork barrel should be removed..

    With the recent S.C ruling on EO 464, we alreay know that whatever proclamations she will declare can really be challenged in the SC peacefully. There is no need for Parliament of the Streets, There is no need for Cory to hypocritically pray the rosary. There is no need to strike a compromise deal with the Estradas, the Marcoses, the Reds, the coup plotters. Hindi na kailangan pang magkagulo. And definitely there is no need for another Peopel Power……

  14. Per Rego:
    Yes, impeachment should be the only way to remove Mrs Arroyo peacefully. Now if she preventing that to happen. Then the work to do is to address why is the tactics that she is using. If she is using the pork barrel allocation to bribe teh congress men. Then pork barrel should be removed..

    Again, an oversimplification Rego.

    If everything can be simplified to your ideals..ok na sana.
    If addressing the tactics is the only solution di manood na lang tayo ng chess game o basket ball .

    Addressing tactics is only a prequisite of a strategy.
    Life is not just as as simple as chess ,Rego.

  15. Please allow me to digress..

    I really like the concept of memes are beyond the person as one wise man once said….

    like we credit quotations to someone even without caring if he was the one who said that first….

    and in comment threads parang gusto ko gayahin yung iba na wala na lang tinatawag na pangalan lagyan na lang ng double quotes…

    That means Rego that I have nothing against you ,It just so happen that it was more than two times I have noticed your comments that I have to put your name in my comments.I would not want to leave an impression that I am targetting you because that would be like sleeping and joselu all over again.

  16. It is amazing at how everyone looks at the weak and fragile instiuions of state and believe that it is these men that run these institutions that we see it through the day. Chief Justice Panganiban and his predecessor Davide are but pieces of the rotten system and they simply bide thier time to make it appear that the system is functioning.

    The system is us and we allow these functionaries to have their moment in the sun and disappear without having to do anything substantial. Institutions are lumbering giants that degenerate and devour their sponsors (us) because we allow them to. While everyone celebrates just read Monsod’s column on what the same court did about the issue of the appearance of corruption of the COMELEC.

    A recent piece done by Bill Moyers clearly shows the origins of political power – faith based people power. It is what separates men from beasts. No one knows when this will happen in this country. But happen it will. The alternative is too awfull to comprehend.

    Pls note

    So he had the pastor’s heart but he heeded the prophet’s calling. There burned in his soul a sacred rage—that volatile mix of grief and anger and love that produced what his friend, the artist and writer Robert Shetterly, described as “a holy flame.” During my interview with him he said, “When you see uncaring people in high places, everybody should be mad as hell.” If you lessen your anger at the structures of power, he said, you lower your love for the victims of power.
    I once heard Lyndon Johnson urge Martin Luther King to hold off on his marching in the south to give the president time to neutralize the old guard in Congress and create a consensus for finally ending institutionalized racism in America. Martin Luther King listened, and then he answered (I paraphrase): “Mr. President, the gods of the South will never be appeased. They will never have a change of heart. They will never repent of their sins and come to the altar seeking forgiveness. The time has passed for consensus, the time has come to break the grip of history and change the course of America.”
    When the discussion was over Dr. King had carried the day. The president of the United States put a long arm on his shoulder and said, “Martin, you go on out there now and make it possible for me to do the right thing.” Lyndon Johnson had seen the light: For him to do the right thing someone had to subpoena the conscience of America and send it marching from the ground up against the citadels of power and privilege.
    Like Martin Luther King, Bill Coffin also knew the heart of power is hard; knew it arranged the rules for its own advantage, knew that before justice could roll down like water and righteousness like a flowing river, the dam of oppression, deception and corruption had first to be broken, cracked open by the moral power of people aroused to demand that the right thing be done. “In times of oppression,” he said, “if you don’t translate choices of faith into political choices, you run the danger of washing your hands, like Pilate.” So he aimed his indignation at root causes. “Many of us are eager to respond to injustice,” he said, “without having to confront the causes of it—and that’s why so many business and governmental leaders today are promoting charity. It is desperately needed in an economy whose prosperity is based on growing inequality. First these leaders proclaim themselves experts on matters economic, and prove it by taking the most out of the economy. Then they promote charity as if it were the work of the church, finally telling troubled clergy to shut up and bless the economy as once we blessed the battleship.”
    When he came down from Vermont two years ago for that final interview, we talked about how democracy had reached a fork in the road—what Tony Kushner calls one of those moments in history when the fabric of everyday life unravels and there is this unstable dynamism that allows for incredible change in short period of time—when people and the world they are living in can be utterly transformed for good or bad.
    Take one fork and the road leads to an America where military power serves empire rather than freedom; where we lose from within what we are trying to defend from without; where fundamentalism and the state scheme to write the rules and regulations; where true believers in the gods of the market turn the law of the jungle into the law of the land; where in the name of patriotism we keep our hand over our heart pledging allegiance to the flag while our leaders pick our pockets and plunder our trust; where elites insulate themselves from the consequences of their own actions; where ”the strong take what they can, and the weak suffer what they must.”
    Take the other fork and the road leads to the America whose promise is “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” for all. Bill Coffin spent his life pointing us down that road, in that direction. There is nothing utopian about it, Bill said; he was an idealist but he was not an ideologue. He said in our interview that we have to keep pressing the socialist questions because they are the questions of justice, but we must be dubious about the socialist answers because while Amos may call for justice to roll down as waters, figuring out the irrigation system is damned hard!

  17. The ID system is a good thing. It’s only in this country where a basic thing as a national ID system encounters all possible objections.

  18. It’s just a win some lose some moment for the executive. Although in a way it seems they still have the upper hand.
    The real problem is not about what the law says.
    It’s really more about the reckless & very aggresive ways politics is done in this country.
    I guess the senators are atat na atat na to do the only thing they know how to do – Performe for the intrigue hungry audience.

  19. “I guess the senators are atat na atat na to do the only thing they know how to do – Performe for the intrigue hungry audience. ”

    The commenter has always been consistent that the senate has no use except to conduct investigations in aid of legislation.I guess that he is talking about the SC decison on EO464.

    (ang corny pala pag walang pangalan nagiging impersonal least I tried kahit one time lang..di ko na yata kaya)

    He has also been consistent in saying that give the unicameral setup or cha cha a try.

    If the checks and balances would be eliminated then I would expect more economically infeasible laws to be past like more renaming of streets,more impossible laws like every household to contribute to the sss for the sake of their household help.(what an impossible law)…more laws ,laws laws and laws.

  20. rego said: “there is no need for the nation to self destruct”

    Hope your words are heeded. We’ve sure been working at it for the past 60 years.

  21. there are two sets of people locked in perpetual combat in this country. One thinks absolute power corrupts absolutely..the other one lack of power corrupts absolutely. When they feel their constituency is not growing the way they like..they bash the middle class. The world has become flat have you not noticed at all? The members of the supreme court have a mind of their own in the same manner as most of the middle class have so much information with the touch of the finger tip and they can process their own TRUTH. The middle ground is not moving because there is no compelling reason to do so. You may feel happy or sad with what the SC did but for me it does not mean anything. Its just a statement of fact.

  22. As always, the lawyers are again blurring things. Even with a Supreme Court ruling, the interpretations are diverse! Malacanang claiming some victories, same with the opposition. The lawyers are again the ones who are going to benefit…

  23. MLQ3,

    I guess you are right! It is absolutely premature to make any celebration at all after all, the unconstituionality of the EO464 or parts of it will not help anybody uncover the truth because the officer who led the investigation to discover the truth behind the “Hello Garci” election tragedy might never reveal the truth.

    I just read General Ramon Farolan’s column, “Reveille” (which means the military wake up/morning trumpet call; reveille in simple French means “Wake up!”).

    The conclusion of General Farolan’s most recent article “The Mayuga report and Spy Wednesday” is a vivid reminder of how people at the bottom of the military totem pole function because that’s how they should function. The Master Sergeant’s refusal to grant the request of a superior officer albeit retired to show him a classified document is admirable. However, what is quite obvious while reading General Farolan’s piece between the lines, is that he too, like many Filipinos today, is deeply sceptical and suspicious of Vice-Admiral Mayuga’s sudden change of fortunes.

    What is astounding is that while our lower ranking officers and non-commissioned officers are capable of acting in the most professional military manner and know how to abide by the military rules to the letter, it is their superiors – who possess the power of life and death over them, the rest of the rank and file – who seem to have waylaid professionalism and the basic tenet of the military: integrity, honor and valor.

    What is truly sad (and maddening at the same time), is that our current crop of senior and star-ranking military officers like Vice-Admiral Mateo Mayuga, the latest 3-star ranking AFP officer and Flag Officer-in-Command Philippine Navy, began their career with the most honorable of intentions: to serve their country and to serve it well even at the cost of losing their life.

    That these once valorous officers are mentally induced, morally forced to trade their honor – for a miserable political pat on the back as well as for a spurious command “pin” on their shoulders due to the general crookedness of our political system and the corruption that runs in the blood of our civilian leaders, is downright degrading to the military insitution as a whole and discouraging in the extreme for the next generation of military officers of the nation already born and yet to be born.

    Having said that, I have no sympathy for a top ranking officer who, after a lifelong service to his country, chooses to dishonor his uniform and the tenet of military honor, integrity, valor and in so doing loses every bit of his moral courage just so he could cap his career with some dubious claim to military glory. What a terrible waste!

  24. re # 15:

    Karl, naman…. What wrong with simplifying the issues? To me there is no need to over complicate everything. As a matter of fact it seems to me that over complicating the issues is the one that is killing us now.

    The first Impeachment was not really use to convict Mrs Arroyo. The opposition overcomplicate it with a grand design to call for peopel power….

    We have debated so much on the legality of EO 464. So many ugly words were thrown on the airs from either side, Pero ang bottom line lang naman pala is to wait for the SC decision.

    Now we are debating the legality of peopel’s initiative. Ok so legality ang pinag uusapan. So di ba dapat ay ipasa na sa SC yan at hayaan na sial mag decide dyan?

  25. Here’s simplifying the issues: In the end, the skyrocketing prices of oil will impact more on our lives than anything else being discussed here. Policies along those lines will be more meaningful to our day-to-day lives.

  26. “But what if Gloria’s election lackeys change, erase their thumb imprints through plastic surgery of some kind”–a de brux at 9.

    To “erase thumb imprints,” Gloria will have to ask, and pay for, the services of those “lackeys” who incinerated “Dacer” and massacred “Kuratong Baleleng” (whatever happened to the Senate “Barber Report on Kuratong,” by the way)–and “dispose of” them (meaning “chop-chop”) later.

    Even then, no one–those now OUT of Gloria’s fold–would want to travel this “incontrovertible” THUMBMARKS DO NOT LIE road because the end of the rainbow is “Closure”–and I’m sure they don’t want it “closed” for now–“killing me softly,” of course, is better for “them,” but not for “us.”

  27. Rego and Carl,
    Pag sinabi ko na I would not agree ang labo ko naman.

    Yeah,simplifying is nice.
    and the all time price of oil must be tackled by our policy makers with out saying that it is a regional phenomenom.

    and yes carl I still did not forget that I made this comment on Ricky’s blog..kaya malabo na di ako mag agree sa points mo pati dun sa sixty years self destruction comment…..

    April 10th, 2006 10:10 210

    since I don’t think anyone of these bloggers are policy makers, any proposals for alternatives would remain as proposals.

    before being called pretentious and being obsessed with the present situation please do hear me out…

    lets say we go on like this beyond 2010

    can we put a stop of our post world war two mistakes by making the govenment the employer of the nation…
    not taking advantage of our natural resources or misusing them…
    By government trying to be the monopoly of utilities…
    By finally getting into the privatization.but with out implementibng it properly and leaving it only open to the elite.
    By proposing elimination of duopolies like our ports but having the field continue to be unattractive……

    By not simply allow its computerize systems to share info like SEC,DTI,BIR,BOC,NSO etc.etc…

    So to finish this laundry list of should have done this and what not…

    I will finally tackle the uneconomic and unfeasible laws which our tricamearal legislature where only the bicam matters;
    implement with outit being economically feasible.
    How can a unicameral setup streamline unfeasible laws were its objective I suppose is to create more and more laws without considering that we don’t have money for such laws.

    How to do it…

    Why not one commenter answer this…
    Mr. Vaswani I have read in the news in the past few months that you have a so called movement for our nation’s rise.
    I even saw you in the Inquirer late February holding hands with Gen Danilo Lim in prayer..

    I am not being pretentious here, I want to hear your views.

  28. HVRDS
    I was not sure of the group during that comment two weeks ago…
    I have researched further and the movement that I was talking about
    is the Kilusang Makabansang Ekonomiya .
    So how is the kilusan?

  29. Karl said: “since I don’t think anyone of these bloggers are policy makers, any proposals for alternatives would remain as proposals.”

    Yes, but the senators are policy and law makers. They should focus more on bread and butter issues that impact more on our day-to-day lives.

  30. Karl, the senators have better things to do then all of the endless investigation in aid of whatever.
    Lately there is the bio-diessel law & there are a few others yet that will profit the country in the long term.
    What do you think is in the interest of the senators?
    The country or their survival?
    So the SC has ruled on 464.
    But the Law has no control over ambitions & people who have nothing nothing better to do.
    The senate just becomes a forum for entertaining all sorts of paranoia, curiosities & intrigues.
    If they really have a case why don’t they just file a case in court.
    Since the sennate is a political body. It only means their investigation have political advanteges more than just interested in the law.

Leave a Reply

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