Binay camp: Yes, we’re banana republic, but not due to SC | Inquirer News

Binay camp: Yes, we’re banana republic, but not due to SC

Rico-Paolo-Quicho

Rico Quicho. INQUIRER.net FILE PHOTO

The camp of Vice President Jejomar Binay on Saturday defended the Supreme Court decision granting bail to Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, criticizing Justice Secretary Leila de Lima’s view that the ruling set the state of the Philippine justice system back to that of a “banana republic.”

“The Supreme Court decision affirmed the Vice President’s belief in the fairness and impartiality of our courts,” lawyer Rico Quicho, a spokesperson for Binay, said in a statement.

Article continues after this advertisement

Quicho said De Lima’s description of the Philippines as banana republic was correct but her premise was wrong.

FEATURED STORIES

“We are a banana republic not because of the Supreme Court,” Quicho said.

“This administration’s economic policies have further enriched the elite, while the rest of the country wallows in poverty. Public services are a joke,” Quicho said.

Article continues after this advertisement

Binay’s camp once again raised the country’s transportation woes, saying the administration could not even make the Metro Rail Transit and Light Rail Transit run on time.

Article continues after this advertisement

“We are a banana republic because of the insensitive and inept governance that De Lima seeks to protect with a ferocity that brooks no opposition even from a coequal branch like the judiciary,” Quicho said, echoing the Vice President’s tirades against the Aquino administration.

Article continues after this advertisement

RELATED STORIES

‘Back to banana republic’

Article continues after this advertisement

4 SC justices hit Enrile bail

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

TAGS: Abby Binay, Leila de Lima, Supreme Court

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.