Mongaya: Sloppiness a believable Corona defense?

Sunday, February 5, 2012

IMPEACHMENT court defense lead counsel Serafin Cuevas bared last week his line of defense to the prosecution’s persistent efforts to uncover undisclosed properties and glaring discrepancies in the statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth (SALN) of Chief Justice Renato Corona. He argued that these are mere unintentional mistakes done without malice and could be corrected. These mistakes are not impeachable offenses.

Investigative reporter and blogger Raissa Robles, however, pointed out that the chief justice once took up masters in taxation and corporate law at Harvard University. He also worked for two banks and the SGV before he entered government. As a member of the Supreme Court (SC), he was the ponente of decisions involving graft and corruption that arose from discrepancies in the SALN.

Have something to report? Tell us in text, photos or videos.

With such an impressive background, can we believe Cuevas when he says the discrepancies in Corona’s SALN were unintentional and non-malicious mistakes? On the other hand, is sloppiness a valid and believable defense for the land’s highest arbiter of justice?

I am not a lawyer. But if former justice Cuevas uses this as defense, then sloppiness should be a valid line to get Corona off the hook. From where I sit, if Cuevas is correct in describing Corona as merely being careless in filling up his SALNs through the years, I am appalled thinking that such a man rose to become chief justice.

If our senator-jurors buy carelessness in filling up SALN as a believable and valid defense, will they then allow Corona to continue as chief justice on the grounds that he was merely being sloppy? If Cuevas humiliates Corona by using this line of reasoning, senator-jurors who might acquit him on this ground, in effect, demean the position of chief justice and the SC.

But then, I am not a lawyer. I am not a senator-juror. I can only seethe as I watch television and rant in my columns and blogs and, of course, Facebook.

***

I ranted in this corner about the suspension of politika2013.wordpress.com last week for alleged violation of the Wordpress terms of service. I also e-mailed a complaint to the Wordpress administrators and I was glad they responded within a few hours. They apologized because their system should not have automatically suspended the blog. That same moment, the blog was up and running again.

After publishing a post critical of Corona on Monday evening, the same thing happened again. The blog was suspended and I e-mailed a complaint. After a few hours, the blog was up again but I did not anymore receive an apology from Wordpress.

Young but technology-savvy bloggers told me I could have been a victim of hackers hired by those hit by my views. My friend Rey Bajenting, on the other hand, jested that the blog’s anti-Corona positions could have activated the “Corona virus.”

***

The Commission on Higher Education ordered schools to do away with their “no permit, no exam” policy in tertiary schools on Jan. 22, 2010 yet. I learned that despite this order, the University of San Carlos (USC) continues to impose the policy that resulted in INCs for several students, even if they paid their tuition several days after the finals that semester.

For example, I gathered that some of its business administration students received INC in Marketing 11 for failing to present their admission slips despite payment of the full tuition a week later. Because Mark 11 is a prerequisite for subsequent marketing subjects, they are suffering until now because of tuition issues a semester earlier.

I believe USC must review this policy, even for its high school and elementary students, because it definitely defeats its supposed mission of providing “... timely, relevant, and transformable academic programs responsive to the needs of the local, national, and global communities.” With the “no permit, no exam” policy, USC reveals its real mission that spells “profit first and foremost” and not academic programs responsive to even the needs of its students and their parents.

No matter how USC advertises its supposed vision, mission and values, implementation of the “no permit, no exam” policy is seen by its victims as hypocrisy, even untruthful advertising.

***

Over a year into P-Noy’s term, his “matuwid na daan” policy has yet to clear our roads of carnap syndicates that prey on car owners and naïve car buyers. Their continued operation is only possible because of apparent links with some police units.

One victim, who hails from Mindanao, trusted his cousins--young businessmen who are said to be twins--in Cebu City so much that he bought from them what he thought was a surplus pickup not so long ago. He realized the vehicle was actually carnapped when the TMG arrested him and took custody of the vehicle last December. Because he bought the vehicle from his cousins, he thought they would repay him or, at the very least, help him out of the problem and go after the carnap syndicate. Giduot hinuon siya sa iyang mga ig-agaw ug sa mga polis.

(inbetweencolumns.wordpress.com)