Friday, October 20, 2006


The Court of Appeals 60 days TRO is just a Band-Aid solution. Public anger is ready to explode. The abuse of political power by illegitimate authority -bogus President Gloria Arroyo destroys the fibers of republican democracy. She violated the Constitution several times to remain in power. Where’s the system of checks and balances? Gloria Arroyo is guilty for obstruction of justice, covering-up fraud and stonewalling by deliberately refusing her underlings to cooperate in senate inquiry of alleged anomalies committed under watch. WE, the people must resist Reina Gloria Encantada’s despotic abuses, if not tyranny will triumph. The limits of tyrants are determined by the courage and strength of those whom they oppress. Despotic Malacanang Palace backed track because of the determination and principled grounds of Makati city Mayor Jojo Binay. The fall of discredited and bankrupt Gloria Arroyo regime is imminent and only time can tell.

Why Ermita’s Binay suspension order is void

By Alan F. Paguia
Daily Tribune 10/20/2006
Executive Secretary Eduar-do Ermita’s preventive sus-pension order against Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay, dated Oct. 16, 2006, is illegal and, therefore, void on its face.
First, under Section 63 (a1) of the Local Government Code of 1991 (Republic Act 7160), preventive suspension may be imposed “by the President,” not “by the Executive Secretary” and not “by the Office of the President.” The law is clear and specific. It confers the authority on the person of “the President.” In other words, the exercise of the authority requires the personal attention of “the President.” The Executive Secretary has no authority under the law to impose preventive suspension or issue the suspension order.
Second, under the Adminis-trative Code of 1987 (Executive Order 292, Book III, Title III, Chapter 9, Section 27, sub-paragraph 2), the Executive Secretary has the duty to “IMPLEMENT presidential directives, orders and decisions.” The law does not authorize him to MAKE or ISSUE “presidential directives, orders and decisions.” He may PROMULGATE and IMPLEMENT, but he cannot MAKE them. May
the President delegate such authority to the Executive Secretary? No. The Executive Secretary cannot substitute his personal discretion over the President’s. To do so would, in effect, make him an “acting President.” Under the Constitution, the Executive Secretary can never become an “acting President.”
Third, the order was signed by General Ermita alone. While it is true the Executive Secretary is authorized by law to sign papers “by authority of the President,” it is equally true such authority is limited to IMPLEMENTING, not MAKING “presidential directives, orders and decisions.” In the case of Mayor Binay, the suspension order was MADE by the Executive Secretary, not by the President. The order does not merely IMPLEMENT. It is the suspension order itself. The order does not even mention any suspension order signed or issued by the President herself. Thus, it seems clear that the Executive Secretary is imposing, albeit without legal authority, the subject preventive suspension.
Fourth, while it is true the Executive Secretary is authorized by the Administrative Code to “decide, for and in behalf of the President, matters not requiring personal presidential attention,” it is equally true the matter of placing a duly elected Metro Manila city mayor plainly requires “personal presidential attention.” Moreso where the controversy involves the possible political destabilization of the country’s premiere financial hub.
Fifth, the Executive Secretary’s order admits Mayor Binay had duly requested a “bill of particulars.” The law provides that - BEFORE responding to the complaint - a party may ask for a definite statement or for a bill of particulars of any matter which is not averred with sufficient definitiveness or particularity to enable him to properly prepare his answer (Rule 12, Section 1, Rules of Court, which applies by parity of reasoning with respect to similar factual situations in administrative or criminal cases). The Executive Secretary completely disregarded the request for a bill of particulars without stating nor claiming there was no need for it. Therefore, there is an implied admission there is valid ground for a bill of particulars. Consequently, Mayor Binay could not possibly “properly prepare his answer or responsive pleading.” It would follow that without being given the opportunity to properly prepare his answer, it was UNFAIR for the Executive Secretary to have concluded the issues have been joined. Under the law, preventive suspension may be imposed only AFTER issues have been joined. In Mayor Binay’s case, there appears no proper joining of issues. Therefore, his constitutional right to due process of law was violated when he was placed under preventive suspension.
Sixth, the Executive Secretary’s ruling to the effect that “the evidence of guilt is strong” is in the nature of a quasi-judicial conclusion. Reason dictates it must state clearly and distinctly the facts and the reasons on which it is based. Instead, the order lamely argues “the documents submitted as annexes to the complaint present strong evidence of guilt that some of the employees may be ‘ghost employees’ from their respective offices, collecting salaries from the city government to the prejudice of the latter.” This is an absurd case of a conclusion being supported by exactly the same conclusion. What is the nature of the documents referred to as strong evidence? The order does not say. Which particular annex is referred to as strong evidence? The order does not say. Why are such annexes considered strong evidence of guilt? The order does not say. Who are the particular ghost employees? The order does not say. How many ghost employees are there? The order does not say. The order seems to expect the reader to accept the conclusion of the Executive Secretary as self-evident truth. Is that fair or legal? No. The law abhors unreasonability. An administrative conclusion which does not state its factual and legal bases is necessarily presumed to be baseless in fact and in law. That conclusion is, therefore, unreasonable.
Is General Ermita trying on Mrs. Gloria Arroyo’s presidential shoes for size? So it seems. But he must remember, those shoes were stolen - not just once before, but twice. And the rightful claimant may reclaim it sooner than later.

Photos: Makati Rally

Commission on Audit (COA)
: P3B of P35B
FM funds squandered



Anonymous Anonymous said...

You should read Pat Buchanan's latest:

8:58 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

tiffany and co, louis vuitton outlet, louis vuitton outlet, oakley sunglasses cheap, louboutin, cheap uggs, burberry outlet, michael kors outlet, louis vuitton outlet stores, ugg boots clearance, polo ralph lauren outlet, louis vuitton handbags, air max, jordan shoes, nike shoes, uggs, longchamp outlet, ugg outlet, prada outlet, ray ban sunglasses, michael kors outlet, uggs outlet, louboutin shoes, oakley sunglasses, louboutin outlet, rolex watches, michael kors outlet, louis vuitton, ray ban sunglasses, burberry outlet, longchamp handbags, polo ralph lauren, oakley sunglasses, prada handbags, longchamp handbags, nike free, christian louboutin, tiffany and co, air max, michael kors outlet, michael kors outlet online sale, tory burch outlet, replica watches, gucci outlet, michael kors outlet

11:21 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

true religion jeans, polo lacoste, vanessa bruno, hogan outlet, sac longchamp pas cher, michael kors uk, new balance pas cher, air max pas cher, north face, coach outlet, vans pas cher, coach outlet store online, oakley pas cher, longchamp, nike tn, louboutin, nike roshe run pas cher, ray ban sunglasses, coach purses, kate spade outlet, chanel handbags, true religion outlet, sac burberry, true religion outlet, michael kors, mulberry, nike blazer, true religion jeans, hollister, michael kors pas cher, timberland, coach factory outlet, air max, hollister, air jordan, polo ralph lauren, sac guess, ray ban pas cher, nike air force, kate spade handbags, converse pas cher, north face, nike free pas cher, sac hermes, lululemon outlet online

11:43 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

juicy couture, pandora charms, ugg, wedding dresses, michael kors handbags, pandora charms, ugg, ralph lauren, abercrombie, louboutin, louis vuitton, thomas sabo, juicy couture outlet, montre homme, swarovski crystal, vans, hollister, louis vuitton uk, pandora jewelry, karen millen, sac louis vuitton, oakley, michael kors outlet, rolex watches, ray ban, swarovski, sac lancel, coach outlet store online, ugg boots, links of london, ugg, marc jacobs, ugg pas cher, air max, converse, doke gabbana, supra shoes, toms shoes, gucci, michael kors outlet online, converse shoes, louis vuitton, sac louis vuitton

11:49 PM  
Blogger oakleyses said...

soccer shoes, timberland boots, hollister clothing store, nike trainers, mac cosmetics, valentino shoes, nike roshe, abercrombie and fitch, jimmy choo outlet, air max, abercrombie and fitch, air max, asics running shoes, nike air max, babyliss pro, lululemon outlet, longchamp, soccer jerseys, reebok outlet, bottega veneta, wedding dresses, chi flat iron, ferragamo shoes, new balance shoes, birkin bag, mcm handbags, iphone cases, p90x, north face outlet, vans shoes, hollister, nike huaraches, beats by dre, nike roshe run, mont blanc, insanity workout, giuseppe zanotti, herve leger, celine handbags, ralph lauren, ghd, baseball bats, instyler, nike free, north face jackets, nfl jerseys

11:54 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

free web counter
free web counter