Posted by akosistella on May 20, 2010
‘Stop whining, Noynoy’
BIG DEAL By Dan Mariano
Monday morning I posted this “status” on my Facebook account: “I am beginning to sense that a lot of my friends, including those who voted for Noynoy, find his adversarial attitude toward the new Chief Justice a bit too much. What do you think?”
In minutes, several of my FB “friends” responded.
From Ed S: “I think so too. Time to mend fences and start anew. Besides, winning the election in spite of the odds is more than a slap on their faces. He just has to give them a tap on the back for consolation and enough of these rantings.”
Click Dan Mariano.
Form and substance
THE LONG VIEW By Manuel L. Quezon III
SINCE CHIEF JUSTICE RENATO CORONA decided to accept the poisoned chalice from President Macapagal-Arroyo, the least he is expected to do is to drink from it. Not least because he has gotten to be chief justice due to efforts and arguments first forwarded in 1998—when his appointment as a judge by President Ramos was voided by the Supreme Court—and which finally bore bitter fruit in 2010, when the Court granted itself an exemption from constitutional prohibitions on presidential appointments during the campaign and transition period, thus paving the way for Corona’s becoming chief justice.
So in a sense he is joined at the hip to the point of view that there shouldn’t be any sort of ban on appointments during election periods or in the transition from one administration to the next. And here, the contrast between this assertion—whether on the part of President Arroyo, who set aside precedents dating back to her own father’s revocation of the midnight appointments of his predecessor—and the present Supreme Court itself (in granting itself an exemption) not to mention Corona himself, who ignored former Chief Justice Manuel Moran’s decision, based on delicadeza, to decline an opportunity to return to the high court by means of a midnight appointment, is instructive.
Via Manolo Quezon
Shape up, Comelec
CALLING A SPADE…By Solita Collas-Monsod
May I ask why it is that nine days after elections, the PPCRV’s tally still covers barely 90% of the election returns? Surely by this time all 76,000 PCOS machines should have been able to transmit the results electronically. That is, after all, part of what an Automated Election System is all about. After all, the Comelec itself had originally stated that two days after the elections, the tally would be complete.
PPCRV has a lot to answer for, as far as I am concerned, particularly because it opposed (successfully) the accreditation of Namfrel which has more than 27 years and at least eight national elections’ worth of counting experience under its belt, compared to PPCRV’s zero experience. At the same time, Comelec also has a lot to answer for because it allowed PPCRV to conduct a public count, even if its accreditation — at least originally anyway, was limited to a count for internal purposes only. If I remember correctly, Comelec’s reason for not accrediting Namfrel was because the elections would be automated, and everybody would have access to the transmitted election returns, so Namfrel raison d’etre was gone. Or some such rot.
Via WInnie Monsod
Fraud will out
FRONTLINE By Ninez Cacho-Olivares
That fraud marked the automated polls can hardly be denied even if it is being vehemently denied by poll officials. But the blame really falls on the Commission on Elections, the Parish Pastoral Council for Responsible Voting (PPCRV), and even members of Congress who were so gung-ho over automated polls and not bothering to insist on checks for the entire system, including the Comelec’s cavalier attitude in doing away with the important security checks.
And that is where the big problem of the credibility of honest elections comes in.