Treachery at the Philippine Supreme Court

On August 18, 2015, the Supreme Court granted the bail petition of Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, one of the three senators facing plunder charges in connection with the pork barrel scam. The decision was announced by Supreme Court spokesman Ted Te, who was visibly embarrassed with what he had to say at the press briefing.

“The court granted the petition for bail of petitioner Juan Ponce Enrile, subject to the terms and conditions to be specified by the Court in its Order which will be forthcoming,” he said. He did not provide any details.

Anger, disgust, contempt . . . and even more negative unspeakable sentiments toward the eight associate justices of the Supreme Court are what curdled in my core when they granted bail to Enrile for a non-bailable charge of plunder.

I had the same guttural reaction when the Supreme Court decided that GMA granted ERAP an unconditional pardon, thereby allowing ERAP to run for public office and resume his criminal political enterprise—when he should have been rightfully executed to death after his conviction of plunder if not for the political machinations of GMA and the bicameral congress.

Because the punishment for plunder had been watered-down from death to reclusión perpetua (life imprisonment), Enrile will NOT be executed to death when he is convicted of plunder but will only serve a sentence of life imprisonment while being barred from holding political office. It’s about time Enrile got convicted of something . . . anything, in light of the innumerable and grave crimes he and his progeny have perpetrated since the Marcos Dictatorship to the present.

Next to Marcos himself, Enrile was (and apparently still is) the quintessential “all-powerful” and “untouchable”, except that Enrile has managed to remain consistently at the apex of the political food chain up to the present day, well after Marcos was puked out of the country thirty years ago. Until recently, no one dared to accuse Enrile for fear of a gruesome and/or deathly reprisal. Hence, convicting Enrile of plunder today would be analogous to the conviction of Al Capone for tax evasion nearly a century ago. As the saying goes, “There’s plenty more where that came from.”

Enrile has been an exceptionally corrupt government official and he has been exceptionally skilful in extricating himself from tight situations like the one he’s just gotten away with. The Supreme Court had an exceptional opportunity to apply the rule of law to an individual who has skirted the law all his life. And the Supreme Court blew it!

It was bad enough that Enrile exploited his alleged ailing health to avoid confinement in a jail cell and be transferred to a hospital (PNP General Hospital then Makati Medical Center). Any ordinary criminal would have simply expired in a jail cell as a result of his ailing health. Why should an extraordinary criminal like Enrile be treated any better?

It’s another matter altogether for the Supreme Court to grant Enrile bail on a non-bailable charge of plunder, thereby creating a loophole, establishing a precedent and providing an easy way out for any individual charged with a “non-bailable” offense—whatever that means today.

No wonder the go-to lawyer of super crooks and, not surprisingly, Enrile’s counsel, Estelito Mendoza, foreshadowed that the veteran senator “will be overjoyed to regain his freedom.” This was followed by another shameless proclamation by another counsel of Enrile, Lawyer Joseph Sagandoy. He said, they will “immediately post the required bail so the senator can again actively perform his duties and responsibilities as a senator”—even though Enrile’s non-bailable charge of plunder should have already stripped him of his functions as a senator.

Note that the above intent of Enrile to actively perform his duties and responsibilities as a senator directly negates his petition for bail citing his advanced age. If he can function at the Senate, then he sure as hell can sit through his case in court in a jail cell, like all the other plunderers. The other so-called mitigating circumstance, voluntary surrender, is nothing more than selling a favor that doesn’t exist. The fact is, the world has gotten much smaller for corrupt government officials like Enrile. He would have been picked-up in a heartbeat if he tried to escape; therefore, voluntary surrender was his only recourse.

The worst part that renders the Supreme Court a supremely inutile body is that the plunder case against Enrile “will practically go back to square one since the Supreme Court also granted his motion for bill of particulars last week.” Hence, “The prosecution will have to amend the information against him or provide the required details and particulars of the charges against him. Otherwise, the case may be dismissed,” according to Lawyer Sagandoy. (underscore mine)

So, the Supreme Court’s decision on Enrile’s petition appears to be far more sinister than just granting bail to an old fart. It’s a superbly orchestrated prelude to unencumbered freedom with all the trappings of the diabolical Enrile. Thanks to the cooperation and collaboration of eight associate justices at the Supreme Court, who were all appointed by GMA . . . who has been allowed to remain under hospital arrest . . . who is also raring to be released on bail on humanitarian grounds. Well, well . . . what a happy coincidence!

Predictably, the next in line to petition for bail would include GMA, Sexy, Pogi and, when they are finally charged for plunder and slapped in jail, Binay et al. After all, the floodgates have been opened. The following are the names and faces of the traitors in the Supreme Court. May their souls rot in hell!

Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr.
Presbitero J. Velasco, Jr.
Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro
Teresita J. Leonardo-De Castro
Arturo D. Brion
Arturo D. Brion
Diosdado M. Peralta
Diosdado M. Peralta
Lucas P. Bersamin
Lucas P. Bersamin
Mariano C. Del Castillo
Mariano C. Del Castillo
Jose P. Perez
Jose P. Perez

Jose C. Mendoza
Jose C. Mendoza

print

Post Author: Virtual Vigilante

Leave a Reply

37 Comments on "Treachery at the Philippine Supreme Court"

Notify of
avatar
Sort by:   newest | oldest | most voted
ice cube
Guest

if this doesn’t make it clear…we definitely have a government of men, not laws

cezar
Guest

This is corruption BIG TIME in the judiciary branch of the Philippine government….ahhhh not only judiciary ..it is in all three branches of the government… harap harapan yan lutong macaooooo…now citizens of the Philippines what are you going to do about ittt….just talk about it and complain ….wakkkkeeeeeeee up Filipinos do something about it…civil unrestttttt… this is harap harapan ginagago kayooo..ohh my goddddd god help the Filipinos…

Kiatan
Guest

Bad news bro they are too busy watching every dumb fucking telenovela to be bothered by this serious situation. Another stupidity is they want GOD would do all the work to punish this assholes rather than they themselves take action, like God would even lift his fingernail.

vagoneto rieles
Guest
Juan Ponce Enrile, being an old man, is now exempt from imprisonment, and quite possibly, free to do any thing he wants.. lawful and unlawful. The problem is that, this man was in complete control of his faculties at the time of the PDAF ‘free-for-all’ among Senators and Congressmen. He was fully aware of the things he was doing, therefore, responsible for his actions. Must he now be given a pass for being old; allowed to sit in the Senate, and proceed with business as usual’? This is a precedent whose effects will come visit us at some future dates,… Read more »
d_forsaken
Guest

A crazy country, choking air, polluted hearts, treachery. Treachery and treason.

Add
Guest
That is the thing I don’t understand. Enrile just requested that his prosecutors give him a Bill of Particulars – meaning clarify exactly the crime he is accused of committing, when and how he supposedly committed it, and what the evidence is to prove such a crime. If the crime is plunder resulting from the use of his pork barrel, it is a crime that requires a series of acts. Enrile wants to know what those acts are – when and how those acts were committed, how much the amounts involved in each act are, and whom he dealt with… Read more »
Cezar
Guest

How about the Maguindanao massacre they approved bail of the son..who took part but not in the so called meeting planning is that Pinoy or what you called yellow turd …commmonnnnnnnnnn get realllll don’t be biassssss…its is everybody in the government are corrupt they scratch each other’s back so the stealing of your money continues…

Add
Guest
@Cezar Guess you may be right; I am biased, probably, even very biased. In the SC, there is one there, I really don’t like: Leonen. He is in the clique of Ferrer and Dilis, academics who are convinced that the solution to the problem of Muslims in Mindanao could be solved by a two-state solution, like Philippines has the same conditions as that of Israel with regards to the Palestinians. They even had the guts to tell a group that PHL will soon become part of ASEAN Integration anyway, so sovereignty doesn’t matter that much anymore, like in EU. Well,… Read more »
Passy
Guest
Wow this is exciting! The inquiring view of Add, a GRP writer himself seems to challenge the settled view with finality of the Virtual Vigilante, the GRP author of the above article! Add – “And now that a Pandora’s box has been opened, it appears that PNoy does not have solid case that will stand in court against anybody with regards to PDAF, as well as with GMA.” VS. Virtual Vigilante – “The Supreme Court had an exceptional opportunity to apply the rule of law to an individual who has skirted the law all his life. And the Supreme Court… Read more »
Tank
Guest
Plunder being a non-bailable offense does not mean bail is impossible. It means bail is discretionary and may be granted by the court if the evidence of guilt is not strong. “Non-bailable” is a misleading term but that’s procedure for you. Apparently, the case for plunder against Enrile is flimsy. If the information is inadequate, a bill of particulars is the proper remedy. If granted, then that says a lot about the quality of the accusations. It indicates that the case is weak and the prosecution needs to be more specific to indicate guilt being strong. If anything, blame the… Read more »
Passy
Guest

If that’s the case, the the point goes to the inquiring view of Add more than the highly emotional view of the author for missing the point!

Cezar
Guest

Ohhhhh common man,,,who you kidding ,,,,,,,yourself….even Gigi Reyes her own personal secretary and mistress say she picked up the moneyyy for himmmm…..common,,,,,,,, the outrage is not over blownnnnnn it is now OVER DUE…. organise a civil unresttttt…and demand justice….My fellow Filipinos if you do not do something to protest this move by the justices……then I rest my case…you all deserve what your are getting…

Jenny Gillette
Guest

No, NO , NO….NON-BAILABLE means BAIL IS NOT AN OPTION FOR THE CHARGE.It is UNAVAILABLE TO THE ACCUSSED, as in ‘BAIL IS NOT POSSIBE WHEN CHARGED WITH A NON-BAILABLE OFFENSE’…..

it is not ‘Rocket-Science’, and it is obvious you are not a ‘Rocket Scientist’, BUT YOU really should be able to grasp the concept.

Tank
Guest

Bail is possible. I know it sounds counter-intuitive but an offense being “nonbailable” does not mean bail can never ever be granted. It simply means bail is discretionary on the part of the judge. It may only be granted if evidence of guilt is not strong.

Bail is a constitutional right and cannot be wiped out completely by a statute declaring an offense “nonbailable”. It just means the standards allowing the granting of bail are much higher.

Ask any lawyer or do your own research on Google.

virtual vigilante
Guest
CNN Philippines, August 19, 2015. The courts will always have the discretion to grant bail, even in nonbailable offenses, Dean Nilo Divina of the University of Santo Tomas College of Law explained. According to Divina, calling an offense “bailable” ensures that bail is a matter of right and cannot be denied by the court. On the other hand, calling an offense “nonbailable” means that it is not a matter of right, and that the granting of the bail will be on the court’s discretion. I think we all concur with the foregoing explanation of Divina. Enrile has been charged with… Read more »
Ren
Guest
Tank, bail is only possible to the accused of nonbaillable crime if, 1. The accused is a high ranking official, 2. The accused is rich, 3. The accused has ties with powerful people in the government. When was the last time you heard of a poor criminal who was granted bail for a nonbaillable offense? In Enrile’s case, it is a matter of fact that the cases against him are strong. The SC granted this seasoned criminal bail because of his health, and not because of the plunder case against him. This SC really makes a joke out of the… Read more »
virtual vigilante
Guest
Tank, I beg to differ. There is nothing overblown about my outrage and righteous indignation with respect to the extraordinarily lenient treatment of Enrile by our so-called justice system. What could be more humanitarian than a hospital arrest for a super crook. I would call that 5-star treatment. We’re not getting any justice at all, even for crimes of high treason like plunder. Your perspective blunts our ethical sensitivity that leads to regressively inferior and ineffective modes of enforcement. That said, the fact that you can’t stand Enrile suggests you are aware of what this scumbag is all about. That’s… Read more »
Tank
Guest

To get justice you must prove his crimes first. Until then, he’s entitled to his presumption of innocence and bail.

You think Enrile is evil and he probably is but part of “rule of law”, a phrase bandied about frequently in this site, is that sometimes unsavory people get a reprieve, at least, for the time being.

Mere feelings and beliefs of his character are ultimately irrelevant. You have to trust in our judicial system. Otherwise, you’re no better than Pnoy’s hatchetmen who regularly disparage it.

Jenny Gillette
Guest

@ TANK, NO THANKS…you go trust the Philippine justice system, I’ll pass.
it has already been proved that the criminal justice system in the Philippines is anything but a ‘JUST-ice’ system, so….you go ahead….

Ren
Guest

Tank,

There are instances where I trust the Justice System in our country, and there are times I do not. This is one of the time when I do not trust the justice system.. este the SC judges who were in favor of granting bail to Enrile, who is one of the most corrupt and worst politician who ever served in government.

Jenny Gillette
Guest
NON-BAILABLE MEANS NON-BAILABLE! Apparently the Philippines is where the definition is lost on the court. In most countries I have been to, the term ‘NON-BAILABLE’ is not used. I am also not a lawyer, and apparently, the Philippines criminal justice system is a two-tiered justice system. Show me an example of a regular citizen who is not an ‘elite’ and a case in which a ‘NON-BAILABLE’ offense is charged to the non-elite perpetrator and that non-elite citizen was granted bail,yes ? Want to know why the Philippines is soooo far fucked and shall never be a country with a future… Read more »
charlie
Guest

Non bailable means NO BAIL ALLOWED….huwag mo kaming gaguhin…

Tank
Guest

Can’t blame you if you don’t get it.

47Toro007Hyden987
Guest
Crime pays in the Philippines. If you are a Politician; Steal as much as you can; most of the Justices of the Supreme Court are Political Appointees. And, are beholden to their Political Masters; not to the People of the Philippines. Enrile had been Stealing with Marcos. He Changed Master, to Aquino, to save his own skin. He knew that the U.S. C.I.A. is removing Marcos. Together, with his son-in-law, Honasan, who is also corrupt. They performed a Political Zarzuela, called: “EDSA Revolution”… Corruption prevails in our country; because of these people. These people are Rotten to the Core…as worse… Read more »
Gagong Lipunan
Guest

If you live in a place where money is above law, i’s not surprising for lowly commoners to just accept that fate, ’cause they can’t realistically do anything about it.

Lucky for you, buddy. You managed to get out of such a hellhole.

57Hayden007Toro986
Guest

@Gagong Lipunan:

Thanks God…I got out…and have a good career..and good family life. I find no future living in our country.

The Feudal Oligarchs are in charge. Politicians can Steal as much as they can; and will never go to jail. Squatters are taking over Metro Manila. Several insurgencies in our country. The country has no good future…no choice, but to get out…

Jenny Gillette
Guest

THAT IS CORRECT, GET OUT NOW !!!! WHILE YOU CAN !!!! IF YOU DO NOT LEAVE YOU WILL HAVE NO FUTURE, NONE !!! NO FUTURE, NO FUTURE< NO FUTURE FOR THE FILIPPINES AND THE FILIPINO PEOPLE !!!!

It is sad, but it is true !!!

ice cube
Guest

when the grounds that overturn a decision not fixing bail are not raised by the accused in a lower court are then given merit and argued by the supreme court itself to grant the accused bail, then there can be little doubt that this is a “special accomodation”. so the takeaway from this case is the rules do not apply to enrile. great job SC.

Jenny Gillette
Guest
These people even LOOK like conniving scumbags, YUCK ! AND CORRECTION ****** THESE SCUMBAGS HAVE NO SOUL ! Enrile is probably the person who tops the list as longest running scumbag in Filipino politics. A rare distinction that is ‘the old scumbag’ alone. The sleaziness and scumbaggery this POS has had to stoop to in order to survive, unscathed, in Filippine politics since the time of the Ultimate Scumbag himself, Ferdinand Marcos, is most ikely unrivalled since the time of the Romanoff family. Unlike the Romanoff’s though the leacherous puss-bags that infest the Filipino political landscape have escaped what should… Read more »
Jenny Gillette
Guest

NO ONE GETS MAD AT THESE SCUMBAGS EITHER ? Thses sorts of sctions could be easily discouraged, but no one even thinks about how that could be accomplished.

Go RICO
Guest

Hey, Vigilante. I confess, I’m glad the Supremes let the old man out. Now Philippines can “Go “RICO” on EVERYONE!!!

In the 1970s, USA passed a powerful law “Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization” (RICO) Act, designed specifically to prosecute Criminal Conspiracies like (the Mafia).

If convicted, all conspirators lose ALL PROPERTY and Assets they own, PLUS, they must pay 3 Times the damage to the victims.

In the Philippines case, 1) Political Dynasties have 1) Defied the Constitution to cling to Power in order to 2) Enrich themselves through Laws they passed, and 3) Plundered public funds through PDAF and DAP

virtual vigilante
Guest

Go Rico, brilliant suggestion on the RICO Act. It should be passed alongside the Anti-Dynasty Bill… or perhaps we are both dreaming?

virtual vigilante
Guest

Revisiting the RICO Act, I highly recommend watching the HBO TV series Boardwalk Empire. What impressed me throughout the series was the striking resemblance of the blatant back-door deals of organized crime with politicians and government in the US nearly 100 years ago with the intimate collaboration of organized crime with our politicians and government officials in the Philippines TODAY. We clearly have a long battle ahead with no less than the Supreme Court setting us back a few more decades.

77Toro007777Hayden
Guest

Congress and Senate; together with the Executive Branch and Judicial Branch of our government are one Organized Crime. They are populated by Criminals…
Aquino is the foremost criminal…

Ren
Guest

Aquino is the foremost criminal? Really? Can you support your accusations with facts and logic, please?

marius
Guest
virtualvigilante: that’s actually a very apt comparison. People forget that the US is a young country and was plagued by corruption and crime for most of its recent history. It still is, to a certain extent, but it manages to make things work nonetheless. The Philippines could learn a great deal from studying US history. All of the problems they faced 100-200 years ago are the problems that Filipinos face today: land distribution, crony politics, environmental management, violence and lawlessness, etc etc. Americans have had better results in some areas than others – human societies will always be a work-in-progress… Read more »
Wendell Shrefler
Guest

Appellant theorizes that the trial court erred in not giving credence to his assertion that he killed the victim because she provoked him, and that mere suddenness of the attack did not mean that treachery attended the killing. The fact that the victim was in a stooping position was purely incidental and was not deliberately sought by him; otherwise, the victim would not have been able to run after she was first stabbed.

wpDiscuz