Trillanes: I will expose Binay paid for TRO
Palace frustration
Malacañang on Tuesday also expressed its frustration with the country’s justice system.
According to presidential spokesperson Edwin Lacierda, the Maguindanao massacre and the plunder case involving former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo were among the “most frustrating cases” that President Aquino wants to see resolved before his term ends next year.
“We’d like to see the cases resolved. But again, we have no control. That’s a limitation of a tripartite form of government that we have no control over the judiciary,” he said.
Lacierda said the 2009 Maguindanao massacre in which 56 people, including 34 local journalists, were ruthlessly killed, allegedly by members of the Ampatuan political clan, was “one of the cases that we would like to see resolved in our administration.”
He noted the case “has been ongoing for several years. A number of accused persons have been arraigned, but a number, as well, are still in hiding or have not been arraigned.”
READ: Sajid Islam Ampatuan granted bail
Arroyo cases
At the same time, Lacierda said “lest we’ll be accused of saying that we are politicizing it, we have no updates on the cases of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.”
Arroyo has been detained on hospital arrest at Veterans Memorial Medical Center over a plunder case involving the alleged misuse of P366 million Philippine Charity Sweepstakes Office funds from 2008 to 2010. She is also facing an election offense case filed by the Commission on Elections.
Lacierda disputed Arroyo family members’ claim that the cases were part of the administration’s “political persecution” of the former president, now a Pampanga legislator.
“I understand where it is coming from. But the bare fact is it is beyond our control. It’s within the discretion of the courts to decide on the fate of the accused,” said Lacierda.
“It is based on our discretion to file cases against an accused, whether it’s as high as a former President or as low as a clerk. However, it’s not within our province to decide the fate of an accused. The fate is decided by a judge or justices,” he said.
READ: Palace accepts dismissal of graft case vs Arroyo
Why the challenge?
Pimentel wondered why the Ombudsman’s preventive suspension order had to be challenged by the Makati mayor at all, noting that it was not a penalty, but the “self-defense [action] of the state.”
“Why the vehement resistance [to the preventive suspension order]?” he said.
Pimentel explained that an official’s temporary suspension is implemented to prevent the possibility of him or her tampering with the evidence. He added that the official, once cleared of misconduct would be given back wages.
But he said the Office of the Ombudsman should also review its rules. He said its charter stated that its findings and decisions are appealable to the Supreme Court, but it drafted new rules allowing its decisions to be challenged before the CA. With a report from Tarra Quismundo
RELATED STORIES
Binay under probe over Pag-Ibig fund anomalies, says Trillanes
Trillanes on Binay Jr.’s suspension: ‘It’s far from over’
