Author Topic: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE  (Read 1295 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

entrepreneura

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« on: June 02, 2012, 11:45:07 AM »
Miriam explains not guilty vote

By Senator Miriam Defensor Santiago

As Posted on ABS CBN


The Constitution provides that in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall be presumed innocent, until the contrary is proved.  The burden of proof is on the prosecution.  How much proof is necessary?  In other words, what is the standard of proof?  I have adopted the very high standard of “overwhelming preponderance of evidence.”  My standard is very high, because removal by conviction on impeachment is a stunning penalty, the ruin of a life.

The defendant admitted that he did not declare his dollar accounts and certain commingled peso accounts in his SALN.  Did this omission amount to an impeachable offense?  No.

Under the rule of ejusdem generis, when a general word occurs after a number of specific words, the meaning of the general word should be limited to the kind or class of thing within which the specific words fall.  The Constitution provides that the impeachable offenses are: “culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust.”  An omission in good faith in the SALN carries a light penalty, and is even allowed to be corrected.  Thus, it is not impeachable.

The Constitution simply provides that a public officer shall submit a declaration under oath of his assets, liabilities, and net worth.  That is all.  There are no details.  The Constitution is a brief declaration of fundamental principles.  Many constitutional provisions are only commands to the Congress to enact laws to carry out the purpose of the charter.

As a general rule, constitutional provisions are not self-executory.  The usual exceptions are the Bill of Rights, and constitutional prohibitions.  All other constitutional provisions, such as the SALN provision, need implementing laws to provide the details.  Hence, Congress, to implement this constitutional provision, has passed a number of laws, including the Foreign Currency Act, which confers absolute confidentiality on dollar deposits.

There is no conflict between the Constitution and the Foreign Currency Act.  The perceived conflict is so simplistic that it is seriously laughable.  If there is any conflict, it is between the Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards, which provides for a waiver of confidentiality; and the Foreign Currency Act, which provides for absolute confidentiality.

It is for Congress to balance on the one hand, the need for public accountability from public officers; with, on the other hand, the desperate need for foreign investment, which entails confidentiality, on pain of driving away investors from our country.  The argument that a dollar deposit protected from inquiry would nullify the principle of transparency is for Congress to resolve.  We could retain the absolute confidentiality clause, with the amendment that Filipino public officers are not protected.

The prosecution mistakes admission for confession.  In a confession, the defendant admits guilt. In an admission, the defendant merely states facts, which might tend to prove his guilt.  In the instant case, the defendant did not make a confession, but merely an admission, with a legal defense.
As a former RTC judge, I find it reprehensible that the AMLA document was introduced in evidence, without authentication, as required by the Rules of Evidence.  I am deeply disappointed that on at least three occasions, the prosecution claimed that its documents came from an anonymous source.  Are you for real?  Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus.  False in one thing, false in all things.

The defendant used his own name in all his questioned transactions.  He could have done otherwise, if his purpose was invisibility. Why would a suspected criminal leave his calling cards at the scene of the crime?

Assuming for the sake of argument that there is a preponderance of evidence for the prosecution, the preponderance is not overwhelming.


Miriam goes ballistic, says CJ not guilty


=======================================================

If we try to analyze what she just said on her speech... talagang may essence yung sinasabi nya.

from the very start of the process... may mali na agad e.
 

PesoRepublic.com | Your smart guide to money matters and entrepreneurship.

SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« on: June 02, 2012, 11:45:07 AM »

Mountain View

WorldPerksPH

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 367
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2012, 11:48:03 AM »
Reading the speech article has a lot of point to consider. mukhang tama nga si Madam Miriam on her analysis.



Check it here.

Click the image to learn more...

IntraLover

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 339
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2012, 05:14:06 PM »
Madam senator, ang batas kay juan ay batas din kay renato. There was this case .... SC dismissed a court interpreter for non declaration of her market stall. What makes xCJ different from her? eto yung sinasabi nga ni Madam Legarda sa kanyang speech e... walang kinakampihan ang batas.

entrepreneura

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 128
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2012, 05:15:26 PM »
so magkaibang case yung dalawa... and why would someone use such reasoning eh magkaibang kaso ito...  kaya nga may investigations. and decision should be made though the evidence presented... and not trial by publicity... they kept on saying that senators will vote according to their conscience.... NO!!! they should vote according to the legality and the evidence presented...
« Last Edit: June 02, 2012, 09:24:32 PM by entrepreneura »

Ken312

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 153
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
Re: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2012, 09:26:33 PM »
Miriam is the best senator of the Philippines...brave, genius, educated, fearless, morally upright, spotless, very honest, beautiful, smart, knowledgeable of laws, I wish Philippines will have more of her.Unlike some of your senators are D-lister actors, low IQ, corrupt, greedy, lacks education to be a senator. Mariam Santiago for President of the Philippines

PesoRepublic.com | Your smart guide to money matters and entrepreneurship.

Re: SENATOR JUDGE MIRIAM SANTIAGO EXPLAINS WHY NOT GUILTY VOTE
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2012, 09:26:33 PM »

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Views Last post
0
475
Last post May 17, 2012, 08:30:41 PM
by BusinessManPH
1
756
Last post September 02, 2012, 08:48:38 AM
by WorldPerksPH
13
2409
Last post June 02, 2012, 03:24:28 AM
by entrepreneura
1
1001
Last post October 21, 2014, 01:39:54 PM
by WorldPerksPH
2
934
Last post November 20, 2015, 12:49:13 PM
by MoneySensePH

Posting Disclaimer: Any individual may post a message in this forum and may do so anonymously. Therefore, the sole author is exclusively and entirely responsible for all opinions in that message. They do not represent the official opinions of PesoRepublic , its administrators or moderators or the PesoRepublic Management. PesoRepublic is merely acting as an impartial conduit for constitutionally protected free speech and is not responsible and will not be held liable for the content of such messages. Community & Groups - Top Blogs Philippines