The true meaning of Public Service

Public Service

1. Service provided or supported by
a government or its agencies.
2. Agency involved in providing public service
for or on behalf of a government.

Public office is a public trust. The most promising yet provocative lines that we can hear from our very own politicians (former and incumbent). I don't think the sentence itself is vague enough that they confused themselves by its ambiguity.

Over a decade, Philippines has been consistent in placing itself in the rank of the most corrupt countries in the South East Asia. In spite of being a 3^rd World Country whose economy is on the brink of bankruptcy, it's funny to see how our greed politicians are competing among themselves in acquiring the few remaining wealth (yes, we still have) of this poor nation. And, of course, the easiest way to practice corruption is to run and occupy a seat in the government office. This political custom has passed on from generations to generations, thanks to political dynasty. If you are that desperate, you can represent a certain group of people i.e., salesladies, flight attendants, farmers, fishermen, construction workers, security guards, etc. through a party-list without necessarily prejudicing yourself by being one of the sector whom you are representing. Brilliant. Even the youth has the chance to practice corruption via Sangguniang Kabataan. Only in the Philippines!

As a background, Philippines is composed of three equal branches: Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. Each of them is vested with powers exclusive within their jurisdiction as mandated by the 1987 Constitution – the separation of powers. This gives the three branches the free hand to monitor each other and to ensure that abuse of powers is prevented. This process is also called “check and balance”. To maintain peace and order and to protect the basic rights of the Filipinos, the Legislative Branch composed of 270 congressmen (including 14 seats for party-list) and 24 senators creates laws. Then the Executive Branch implements these laws. The Judiciary Branch prosecutes and punishes violators of these laws.

Philippines' Organizational Structure

Unlike a Monarch type of government which is being led solely by a king (like Great Britain) or emperor (like Japan), our government is rich in leaders. We have approximately 400 government leaders, from President down to SK Chairman and Kagawads. Given this number of leaders, why is it now that Philippines remains underdog when it comes to economy? Why is it that poverty is continuously growing drastically? Why the gradual occurrence of social problems such as heavy traffic, floods, juvenile delinquency, extrajudicial killings and drugs?

The culprit is CORRUPTION.

This may sound pathetic but politics is sure the easiest and fastest way to access the deeply buried treasure box. Politics carries with it not only wealth but power and fame as well.

Who could not have remembered the massive massacre in Maguindanao involving a clash of two political clans, the Ampatuans and Mangudadatu, where hundred lives were taken including civilians and journalists just because the Mangudadatu ran for the mayoral slot of which the Ampatuan had taken over for years. How about the abduction of Bobby Dacer and his driver Manuel Corbito? And little do we know, there have been killings reported involving rivalry among Baranggay officials which have not been published in the newspapers.

Why do these political aspirants kill just to acquire a government position which was primarily created by the law to SERVE the people in the first place? What motivates them to murder innocent lives just to ensure their win every election? How many lives do they have to take away just to exercise this so-called PUBLIC SERVICE.

A political candidate spends MILLION during election campaign because he wants to be elected and serve the people.

COME TO THINK OFF IT.

Injustice in politics

I was watching the news last night and I couldn't help but react on this issue.

The DOJ, after conducting a re-investigation, asserted that Hubert Webb WAS NOT in the US when the Vizconde killing took place. This is contrary to Webb's defense of alibi which was initially accorded greater weight by the Supreme Court as against the testimony of Jessica Alfaro who later on adjudged as not credible witness.

I am wondering why the DOJ conducted a re-investigation on this case in the first place. With these findings, they only worsen the scenario. Clearly, the DOJ rebutted the findings of the highest court of the land which had long become final and executory. It is to be understood, however, that this latest development would not necessarily revoke the acquittal of Webb and his co-accused from the charges since SC decisions are, again, final and executory per se. The newly discovered witnesses and evidence are, practically, futile so to speak. So, why bother to re-investigate? To give false hope to the aggrieved, Lauro Vizconde? Or this is another trial in publicity?.

I am not a lawyer myself. But I fully understood the contents of the SC decision acquitting Webb and other accused from the crime imputed against them by the hapless Lauro Visconde. In the said decision, the SC ruled that the prosecution has not sufficiently proven the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt as there are inconsistencies in the testimonies of Alfaro, ruling otherwise, giving credence to Webb's alibi that he was in the US when the incident happened, making it impossible for him to be one of the perpetrators. In support thereof, the SC cited the maxim “it is better to acquit ten criminals than to convict one innocent accused”. According to the magistrates, in criminal cases, the word “beyond reasonable doubt” should be construed in verbatim.

I, on the other hand, read the dissenting opinion of Justice Martin S. Villarama in the said case. I was rather convince about his intellectual analysis regarding the possibility of Webb's participation to the crime. According to him, giving the connections and wealth of the Webb family, it is not possible for Hubert Webb to freely leave and enter the country anytime he so desires. There was even a question about the authenticity of Webb's passport because the Bureau of Immigration had no record whatsoever of his arrival and departure from Manila to US on the questioned date and time. Lastly, the date of the video footage that he presented does not appear to be the exact date when the merciless Vizconde killing occurred. Justice Villarama, thus, found no probative value on this evidence at hand.

Which is which now? Does it mean the latest decision of the SC, which is now considered as jurisprudence, in effect, erroneous. If so, how could the people rely and trust an institution whose reputation has obviously been tainted?

While the whole nation had respected and accepted the decision of the SC in the Vizconde case under the presumption of regularity, it seems now that our judiciary is not serious in its mandate to serve fair and equal justice to the people.

At the end of the day, Lauro is still the LOSER in this fight....