PCGG does not exist
ConclusionThese nincompoops should have known that when the Constitutional Commissioners used the word “freeze” in Section 26, Article XVIII of the Constitution, they had in mind that those sequestered properties cannot be disposed of or sold until those cases filed against the owners had been concluded finding them guilty as charged. Otherwise, their own appointed constitutional commissioners would not have used another word for sequestration if their intention is to allow the PCGG to dispose and dissipate them, else that would be equivalent to estafa. Pending resolution of those cases, the PCGG stands as nothing more but a legal custodian.
Besides, only incompetent and bankrupt governments would finance their undertakings, no matter how nobly motivated, from funds they could grab from the people, especially those it identified as political enemies. This we say because the enactment of R.A. No. 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program on June 10, 1988 was made conditional and contingent on the amount the PCGG could confiscate.
These morons who now style themselves as legislators should have known it that THERE IS NO LAW ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD THAT MAKES CONDITIONAL AND CONTINGENT GOVERNMENT POLICIES BASED ON HOW MUICH IT COULD GRAB FROM THE PEOPLE. TO ALLOW THAT KIND OF BANDITRY COULD EQUALLY GIVE PRIVATE INDIVIDUALS THE SAME RIGHT TO STOP THE ENFORCEMENT OF THE FINE AGAINST THEM OR FORFEITURE OF THHEIR PROPERTY UNTIL SUCH TIME THEY HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY OR TO STOP THE FORFEITURE OF THEIR PROPERTY.
R.A. 6657 being conditional on the amount the PCGG could sequester and turnover follows that the land reform program of the Aquino administration is at most uncertain. Nonetheless, if this good-for-nothing administration truly wants to implement its land reform, all it needs is to enforce the decision of the Supreme Court ordering the subdivision the family-owned Hacienda Luisita.
The same can be said of the politically-motivated R.A. No. 10368 or An Act Providing Reparation and Recognition for the Victims of Human Rights Violations during the Marcos Regime enacted on February 25, 2013. For the fact that the number of fake claimants swelled because of the cash award, this good-for-nothing government now has to appropriate government funds to give reparations to these self-styled victims. Again, did it not cross the mind of these morons that they openly insulted our soldiers, many of whom were killed, captured and tortured by rebels trying to contain the communist and rightist rebellion and subversion?
These two congressmen, Terry Ridon and Walden Bello, have in fact committed the greatest fraud against the Filipino people; for why should the government appropriate funds directly from the taxpayers’ money to defray those erstwhile rebels turned mendicants? Is appropriating from the taxpayers’ money their clever way to cover up the PCGG’s failure to account the funds it confiscated? Finally, WHY SHOULD OUR SOLDIERS BE MADE TO PAY THROUGH THE TAXES THEY PAID TO COMPENSATE PEOPLE WHO HAVE SWORN TO KILL THEM?
While there were transgressions that resulted in the violation of human rights, this administration should bear in mind that such unfortunate events could have been averted had those rebels not initiated the first move to violently defy the government. THE GIVING OF REPARATIONS TO THE SO-CALLED HUMAN RIGHTS VICTIMS IS AN INDICTMENT THE WAR OUR SOLDIERS FOUGHT WAS ILLEGAL AND MORALLY WRONG, AND THE CASH PAYMENT AMOUNTS TO AN APOLOGY MADE WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT BY THE AQUINO ADMINISTRATION.
In fact, one of the authors of that ludicrous law, a self-styled progressive writer, who have lived much of his life in the US knows that the US committed massive atrocities killing more than 5 million during the Vietnam War. To this day, the US has not made any reparations or much less made an apology fearing it would amount to admission they committed aggression and murderous rampage in Vietnam.
Finally, AFTER MRS. MARCOS WAS ACQUITTED BY THE NEW YORK CIRCUIT COURT ON JULY 2, 1990 FOR ALLEGED VIOLATION ON FOUR COUNTS OF THE RICO LAW, THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN HONORED BY OUR LOCAL COURTS, CONSIDERING THAT IT WAS THE SAME PCGG, THEN HEADED BY JOVITO SALONGA, WHO OPTED TO FILE THOSE CASES THERE, AND SHOULD HAVE BEEN LAID REST. This we assume because our courts, justices, judges and luminaries rely with much exuberance on American jurisprudence as if to authentic their legal arguments.
Yet, this presidential-good-for-nothing commission completely ignored that acquittal verdict. It continuously presents the same evidence it presented in New York to our local courts to justify their sequestration of her properties, including those properties which Congresswoman Imelda Marcos inherited from her parents, and those properties which her husband acquired before their marriage.
In fact, the confiscation of the $867 million Marcos deposit with the PNB has become a landmark decision of judicial stupidity. The Chief Justice in his decision to garnish the escrow account proceeded to convict the money of the depositors, and not the depositors of the money. To justify that, the impeached Chief Justice accused the former President of having such huge amount of deposits that did not tally with his income from the time he was elected congressman to the time he was ousted from office in 1986, and presto came out with the conclusion of it as “ill-gotten” ignoring that it would require a more specific criminal act to prove his allegation.
Still, even if we take it that the PCGG can garnish the escrow deposit, that was however subject to compliance to the conditions set by the Swiss government that there should be a declaration of guilt against the Marcoses by final judgment in a criminal case of having acquired and accumulated ill-gotten wealth. For failure by the impeached Chief Justice Renato Corona, Jr. to find an iota of evidence to convict the accused, he instead proceeded to convict the escrow deposit of the Marcoses, thus making the court he presides the only court on our planet to enunciate a judicial precedent of convicting the money of the accused.
That lunatic decision has raised the possibility of the Marcoses bringing their case to the International Center for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, for clearly the government through THE PCGG IN COLLABORATION WITH THE PNB COMMITTED GROSS VIOLATION TO THE CONDITIONS SET BY THE SWISS GOVERNMENT FOR THE RELEASE OF THE ESCROW ACCOUNT THAT CAUSED SERIOUS DAMAGE TO THE REPUTATION AND INTEGRITY TO THE SWISS BANKING SYSTEM prompting many depositors to withdrew their money and deposit elsewhere where it is safe and secure.
SHOULD THE MARCOSES FILE A CASE BEFORE THE ICSID, BANK DEPOSITS BEING A FORM OF PASSIVE INVESTMENT, THE FORMER ARE LIKELY TO WIN FOR CLEARLY THE ACT OF CONFISCATING THEIR DEPOSIT WAS VIOLATED. These hypocrites need only to be reminded of the case where ICSID ordered the Arroyo government to pay the German firm Fraport for the construction of the NAIA Terminal III.
rpkapunan@gmail.com
No comments:
Post a Comment