In a letter to the editor, Jeremias Tobias raised the possibility that, just like in the case of Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile, the Supreme Court may also overrule the Sandiganbayan and grant bail to former president Gloria M. Arroyo on grounds other than what used to be acceptable “jurisprudence” (“Established jurisprudence?” Opinion, 10/28/15).
In Enrile’s case, the Supreme Court went out of its way to anchor its ruling on something his lawyers did not even dare to mention in their plea simply because no “jurisprudence” supported it. Grant of bail on “humanitarian” grounds was said to be heretofore unheard of. Now, every detained Tom, Dick and Harry would want to avail themselves of such argument to get out of jail! Of course, they are daydreaming; that ruling was “tailor-made” only for Enrile, as the dissenters to that majority ruling stressed.
That majority of eight justices (namely, Lucas Bersamin, Arturo Brion, Teresita de Castro, Mariano del Castillo, Jose Mendoza, Jose Perez, Diosdado Peralta and Presbitero Velasco) once again went brown-bagging and put their own menu on the table—and ram it down everyone else’s throat! Already, the ridiculous idea that Arroyo’s bail grant might be based on the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention’s report is gaining traction.
And now, for good measure, here comes topnotch legal eagle, Estelito Mendoza (him again?) adding his presence and prestige to the pleading before the Supreme Court to let Arroyo go (“If GMA is convicted, P-Noy should worry,” News, 10/30/15). He is the same eristic par excellence who deftly persuaded the majority (eight out of 15) of the Supreme Court justices to let Enrile go home, much to the whole nation’s shock!
Of course, Enrile still faces plunder charges for having supposedly pocketed more than P170 million of public funds. Trial is ongoing. Arroyo herself is grappling with plunder charges involving P366 million of public funds. But seriously, where are these cases really going?
—GRACE PO-QUICHO, gpq_rstu@yahoo.com.sg