Day: January 16, 2009

Related stories :Marcelino appointment covered by AFP regulation

Blame Arroyo for Marcelino appointment

Only in the Philippines.

Imagine a justice secretary giving drug syndicates ammunition to use against law enforcers. The drug lords must be rejoicing.

In his anger towards Maj. Ferdinand Marcelino, who dared talk back to him at a hearing in the House of Representatives, Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez said the Marine officer’s secondment at the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency is unconstitutional. Thus, all the operations conducted by Marcelino could be rendered invalid.

Gonzalez cited a constitutional provision that “no member of the Armed Forces in the active service shall at any time be appointed or designated in any capacity to a civilian position in the government, including government-owned or controlled corporations, or any of their subsidiaries.”

Harry Roque, professor of Public International Law at the UP College of Law and at the Philippine Judicial Academy and chairman of the Center for International Law, disagrees with the justice secretary’s interpretation, saying secondment of Marcelino with the PDA is covered by the powers of the president as head of the bureaucracy.

Marcelino said his assignment at the PDEA was approved by President Arroyo, who is also the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (even if she is a fake president, I must add).

Roque said Gonzalez’ latest tirade against Marcelino “is a very clear indication that he will sustain the dismissal of the drug case against Richard Brodett, Joseph Tecson, and Jorge Joseph tagged by media as the “Alabang Boys” who were caught in a buy-bust in September 2008. The dismissal was aborted by the media leak of bribery that reportedly reached up to P50 million.

Rep. Roilo Golez expressed concern that Gonzalez “wittingly or unwittingly, is sabotaging the operations of PDEA by publicly declaring that ‘Marcelino’s act is not valid.’ Now he has given potentially crucial arguments to the defense counsel of all those facing illegal drugs cases resulting from PDEA operations led by Marcelino.”

Golez said: “A responsible justice secretary thinking of the national interest should have made his legal opinions in closed-door meetings instead of a press conference. In apparently spiting an agency he now considers a nemesis, he forgot his role in the fight against illegal drugs.”

“The justice secretary has become, in my opinion, an unwitting ally of those accused by Marcelino/PDEA of violating R.A. 9165,” Golez said. R.A. 9165 is the Comprehensive Dangerous Act of 2002 that governs government programs and operation to stop the proliferation of illegal drugs in the country.

Golez said with Gonzalez at the helm of the justice department, PDEA’s operations have been neutered. “This is a very sad turn of developments for the anti- illegal- drug campaign,” he said.

Now, let’s see how Arroyo, who has crowned herself drug czarina, will handle this. Will she sanction Gonzalez, who was responsible in installing her in Malacañang despite the fact that she was never elected to the presidency by the Filipino people?

Ding Generoso, a media executive, said if there was any violation of the Constitution with the secondment of Marcelino at the PDEA, it should be Arroyo who should be held accountable. It should be ground for impeachment. “He should be the star witness in a new impeachment complaint against Arroyo,” he said.

Blogger Tongue Twisted enthused: “Yehey! Makakawala na rin lahat ng drug lords na nahuli ng PDEA kasama ng Alabang Boys! Isasauli na rin yung bilyong pisong shabu pati lab equipment na ebidensiya dahil illegal si Marcelino!

“At saka kailangang palitan na yung stock certificates at treasury bonds na P50M. Bobo kasi si Atty. Verano, wrong spelling. Yung last letter ng Gonzales niya ay “s” hindi “z”!

* * *

Government prosecutors who were so enamored with legal technicalities should take a look at this New York Times news report on a Supreme Court decision that evidence obtained from an unlawful arrest based on careless record keeping by the police may be used against a criminal defendant. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/15/washington/15scotus.html?_r=2&hp)

The report said Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., writing for the majority, said that the exclusion of evidence should be a last resort and that judges should use a sliding scale in deciding whether particular misconduct by the police warranted suppressing the evidence they had found.

“To trigger the exclusionary rule,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote, “police conduct must be sufficiently deliberate that exclusion can meaningfully deter it, and sufficiently culpable that such deterrence is worth the price paid by the justice system.”

That price, the chief justice wrote, “is, of course, letting guilty and possibly dangerous defendants go free.”

Wait, there’s more!: Don’t have Paypal yet? What are you waiting for? Sign up now!