Skip to main content

The Lacson Travel Doc Mystery

AT TIMES THE application of law can be so shortsighted it can lose the essence of why laws are made in the first place.

Justice Secretary Leila De Lima is making a big deal on the mystery surrounding the travel document  that allowed Senator Panfilo Lacson to get back into the country from Hong Kong after 13 months in hiding. Of course, it is understandable that the Philippine Passport Act may have been violated. But the context of that potential offense was never to commit a crime but to avoid getting incarcerated for innocence of a crime that may have been made an excuse to persecute a critic of the past administration. If we understand a man who killed someone on self-defense, cannot we do the same on a person who wants to protect his freedom and the honor of the office he is serving?

I would agree with PNoy that getting deeper into the matter in order to put a legal claim on Lacson would be a waste of resources. It is tantamount to a law which had lost its spirit--that spirit that supports the protection of the innocent until proven guilty. Any person persecuted and his freedom threatened will take desperate measures, even violating a minor law, in order to protect himself from a government bent on getting back. I believe every common Filipino will understand that.

Well, of course, it is an affront to the Department of Justice and its law enforcement divisions for failing to get Lacson for more than a year. That is, Lacson has outsmarted them all. It is foolish even to demand from the senator to reveal his friends--friends who helped him in his most difficult of times (should not friends behave that way?)--or to tell them in detail how he outsmarted them (it is like giving a trade secret away that have saved your life so far)?

Moreover, don't government intelligence operatives also use fake documents in their undercover movements in order not to implicate the country who sent them? And will that be inexcusable in the name of national security? In the intelligence world, lots of laws had been bent and even violated in the interest of the country. Should the person's interest in protecting his freedom unjustly assaulted deserve less?

It would be more honest for the Department to admit that they have not the smartest mind in the country, and Lacson have made that clear to them. The Department should instead forget about wounded egos and focus on more important cases than this? Violent crimes, as PNoy said.

At the end of the day, laws are supposedly made to protect the innocent person and prosecute a proven criminal, and not to throw its weight around just to gain respect. Get real! Any Filipino who have Lacson's intelligence and connection will use them in order to avoid getting into jail for a crime he was innocent from.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

"Elite" Cry-Babies?

I CANNOT IMAGINE how an operative of the Special Counter-Insurgency Operations Unit (SCOU), when caught by insurgents and subjective to the worse torture imaginable, can ever survive with their mental faculties intact. But that's exactly what's going to happen if the recent products of SCOU Training cry foul, or more specifically 'hazing,' when they are subjected to the hard realities of law enforcent that handles counterinsurgency operations. Operatives must be physically hard and mentally sturdy to survive the prospect of getting captured without squelling reserved information to the enemy. I am disappointed to hear that the recent batch of SCOUT trainees considered their physical ordeals during training as 'hazing.' Have they entertained the thought that they were in Camp Ceferino Genovia in Barangay Bahay for an exotic 45-day vacation? If they cannot endure physical pain during training, they must ship out because real life counterinsurgency work
Post a Comment
Read more

Skirting the Issues of Bad Journalism

AMADO DORONILA of the Philippine Daily Inquirer writes today about the perceived coercion that President Benigno Aquino III made on the press in defense of his "passion for flashy cars," and for  his lifestyle as a "pampered son of a wealthy family living an unfrugal life." I encountered some confusion on how Mr. Doronila reasoned out his understanding on how frugal life is meant to be lived. Does he meant to keep the money on the vault unused simply for the sake of not spending them? That will be a suggestion for a miser's lifestyle. Aquino may have "bought," actually exchanged, a third-hand Porsche for his old BMW for approximately the same valuation of P4.5 million. In effect, there was no significant money spent for the acquisition, except perhaps a sales tax if that applied. And here Mr. Doronila concluded that the new President of the Republic is living an "unfrugal life" (did he expect Mr. Aquino to sell the luxury car he had befor
Post a Comment
Read more

Gifts of Discounts

SECTION 13 of the New Code of Philippine Judicial Conduct (27 April 2004) stated: Judges and members of their families shall neither ask for nor receive any gift, bequest, loan, or favor in relation to anything done or to be done or omitted to be done by him or her in connection with the performance of judicial duties. Its annotation explains that: Public officials and employees shall not solicit or accept, directly or indirectly, any gift, gratuity, favor, entertainment, loan or anything of money value from any person in the course of their official duties or in connection with any operation being regulated by, or any transaction which may be affected by the functions of their office." The key phrase here is--"in the course of their official duties." It means that as long as a judge remains a judge of Philippine courts, this Code applies, prohibiting any receipt, directly or indirectly, from any person. The question then is: Is a discount a gift? On 3
Post a Comment
Read more