Thursday, August 30, 2012

verdict: apple v. samsung

a question of venue:

should a case for patent infringement go into a regular court or a special body being tasked to monitor patents and trademarks?

patents being a highly technical issue needs a specialized body in order to decide on complaints. this is a quasi-judicial body which exists under philippine law.

what is the true test of patent infringement?

after browsing to such enormous data in the web post-verdict data is just too overwhelming.

so let's go down to the basics. the true test would be whether or not the buyer would mistake one product for the other. this is the ultimate test where a decision could order the destruction of the infringing product. none of that was ever pleaded or awarded. why? it was not awarded because there really was no infringement on the first place. it must have been overwhelming.

so how would one go about buying a cellphone or a 'smartphone' for that matter? therein lies the resolution to all these hyper-noise going on in the cyber-world. i for one would ask the saleslady: ' do you have the latest phone that runs on android's latest operating system?'. if ever i ended up buying an 'apple' then there must be some confusion somewhere. the infringing item on this case would be apple. therefore, destruction would be the next step...not damages for loss of profit. an infringing product has no right to exist in the market. what billion dollar in damages? you kidding me?

the judge was confused and the jury was even more confused. owing to the voluminous data presented to the court. they went into many analytic details. details which proved inconsequential, trivial and unessential. squares, rectangles, rounded corners. etc., those are primitive forms.

under our jurisdiction, the san miguel v. beer na beer case  would seem relevant. in that case, the complaint was dismissed despite the close similarities. i think, samsung should anchor its defense on this and not 'prior art' which sounds off-key.

Friday, May 25, 2012

events: corona defense-a legal technique

the defense of the CJ is a form of legal technique-a trap in order to drag the IC in a situation where there would be a 'question of law' , hence beyond the jurisdiction of the IC since the SC has exclusive  jurisdiction on questions of law.

the IC must stir clear of this obstacle on the FCDA since it is actually irrelevant. the CJ himself said it: " wala pa akong nakitang jurisprudence regarding the alleged conflict".  all it has to do is stick to its guns on the SALN law.

it is actually that simple. the CJ has the prerogative ex oficio with regard to the implementation of the SALN. it is his duty and responsibility to see to it that this is implemented in the judiciary branch. if he had questions regarding its implementation, he should have coordinated with the CSC but that was not to be. there is an existing administrative resolution to hide the SALN's of the justices from the general public.

being the highest administrative officer of his branch, he constituted the appeal board for all discrepancies in the SALN's implementation and regulation. he however, chose not to. this is pure and simple misdemeanor. the failure to perform a duty.

every person who files a SALN knows its requirements. one must declare all forms of financial interests.

the  none observance or application of a law does not repeal it. neither does it mean that there is no law. once it is applied, you cannot question its validity.

you might say that there is no such thing as misdemeanor in the philippine constitution.

misdemeanor is the root word for impeachable offenses together with high crimes, originally provided for under the british parliamentary provision. it understandably circumscribes 'mal-administration' but does not include malfeasance, misfeasance, nor nonfeasance which are crimes specifically defined under the revised penal code.

from misdemeanor sprung what we term as 'betrayal of public trust' and 'culpable violation of the constitution' which are acts not in the category of 'high crimes'. here, there is some truth to the saying that "impeachable crimes are what the 'legislature' says they are", limited only by public policy.

and what is 'high crime'? they are those crimes which are punishable under our penal codes and special laws. the term 'high' being a derivative of the nature of the person's or officer's public office.


i therefore hold that it is an error to use 'ejusdem generis' in determining the impeach-ability of an offense.

you only use ejusdem generis in singular classifications. for example, in 'high crimes', defining all crimes. or in 'misdemeanor' alone defining all forms of misdemeanors.

that is the reason why its usage in 'high crime and misdemeanors' becomes a conjuration of something 'fowl' and 'twisted' because they are two independent concepts.

Wednesday, May 9, 2012

persons: Gabriel Jose Marquez

winning the nobel prize for literature. gabo attributed all his creativity to his early years. his childhood. this he says is (the) root of all his writings. very illuminating!

which reminds of a jesuit dictum: " give me the first early years of a child, after that you can do what you want to do with him". we may also restate and reconfirm the old idiom(proverb) that " the hand that rocks the cradle rules the world",

indeed, our early years, wrapped in innocence, are the closest we can get into our beginnings.

more so, if it were an established activity in the present. going back to its beginning is its most wonderful and inspiring moment. moments which should never be forgotten.

if you go back to the early beginnings of teaching, education all begun with a man sitting under a tree, not knowing that he was a teacher discussing his realizations to a few who did not know they were his students. it may also be said that the existence-will of a school was there even before the incidental event of the 'man under the tree'.

in my early years at st.columban's school, i recall giving away all the candies in a jaar which my pretty teacher left on the classroom desk. she must have went out to pee. she was proly in a dilemma whether or not to charge me for the mis-deed. the  father-rector must have concluded that i was by nature a charitable person.

not only that. i could remember being prepared(rehearsed) to deliver a speech for the father rector's birthday. can you imagine a little boy speaking on stage in kindergarten level?  i cannot recall the speech. it proly went: "happy birthday father ball(Bhal)! please stop scratching your balls"- just kidding!

please click on image to access gabo's short biography.

Saturday, April 21, 2012

archives: cyber plaza miranda

i am re-posting here a series of comments that i have made at raissa robles site . they are meant to be a reference. each comment will be in blockquote which may or may not be followed by additional comments as expansions and point clarification. they are merely part of post comment threads and are basically fragmented. please visit actual posts through links which are provided in the post.

they are ordered as follows: first the topic, followed by my personal comments, and finally further commentaries.

topic: Justice Cuevas took part in a coup attempt against Cory Aquino  

Submitted on 2012/03/10 at 10:20 pm
the old man is a total ‘asshole’. when asked by sen.
enrile as to the degree of proof the impeachment
proceeding must take, he said “proof beyond reasonable
doubt”.its not that he’s a defense lawyer, but for godsake, one
must also show a semblance of being a principled
individual. it should always be the ‘majesty and
supremacy of the law’ and not what is good for his own
comments:  s.cuevas is known for his mastery of criminal procedure. after his removal from the SC, teaching law sharpened his skills. unconfirmed talk has it that it was ms. corona who pleading for him to take the case of the SC-CJ. a graduate of the U.P. Law school during the '50s, and a member of the sigma rho fraternity.

the meticulous manner in which the IC conducts its proceedings is due to his efforts. for example, the submission of evidence which could have been done on a committee/sub-committee level was not implemented in this instance. the IC acted like a regular court of law in the processing of evidences, both testimonial and documentary.

in the future, those who look back would most probably have a good laugh at this scenario. the IC really got influenced by the master of remedial law.

topic:Judge Miriam skips ICC oath-taking as Asia’s firstwoman judge for Corona trial

Submitted on 2012/03/11 at 10:57 am | In reply to johnny
lin. no it’s not…the presence of a ‘quorum’ to do business
determines the unanimity of the votes cast. some senators
may be absent but those present who all voted unanimously
constitutes the ‘official act’ of the impeachment
court..those absent are not part of the quorum neither
did they abstain through their absence…its like they have
abdicated the right to make a decision on the matter..and
they are all bound by the body’s decision

Submitted on 2012/03/11 at 11:32 am | In reply to sam.

‘moot and academic’ na yun kase sinagot na nila ang
complaint. they also participated in the process fully
(despite their penchant for running to the SC if things
were not going their way). i don’t think he will go on a media blitz kung sa tingin
nya hindi siya tagilid. the ‘jose pidal’ trick of FG to pass the buck won’t work
here. ‘deprived of what is due them’ ang mga rightful
owners ng BGEi. sinakmal lahat tapos sabihin hindi sa kanya. the evidence
proves otherwise… isang kasakiman.

topic: Corona through Corona’s eyes

Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 7:17 am nanghihiram lang para ng kotse ang bakulaw na coronang yan! sabi niya they are a family of extra ordinary means..meaning above average sila…yea..extra-ordinary kayabangan nila

Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 10:03 am
here we can see that constitutional flaw which is the
Judicial and Bar Council. unlike the Commission on Appointments, it lacks the
investigative and fact finding powers of the Legislature.
the JBC did not give weight to the BASA opposition and so
we the people are left to take the cudgels of their
neglect. dapat i-abolish na yang JBC at ibalik ang screening sa
CA. by analogy, Congress has the formidable power of
impeachment in its arsenal. its only proper that the
initial screening be within their competence. this is in
harmony with the doctrine on Appointing-Firing power.
like the say, if it’s your mess then you better clean it
up. Executive power is merely ministerial as the
President exercises discretion on the limited ‘screened’
short listing. here its a JBC mess and Congress gets to wipe its ass!
it’s gonna take a constitutional amendment though…

topic:Fr. Bernas suggests condoms are OK

Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 11:02 am
bernas was just trying to find a reasonable and
defensible stand…but wait till his boss in vatican hears about this…
his orders are clear…abstaining from sexual acts and
‘rhythm’ are the only acceptable methods of
contraception…i thought his boss was infallible.
after overturning roe v. wade which declares a stand
within the “1st trimester”(and which still stands as of
this writing) he now tends to contradict the pope!
one thing about these typical jesuits…they never fail to
show their ‘superiority complex’.

Submitted on 2012/03/12 at 11:05 am | In reply to ed.
in fairness..he’s not a snake..rather a ‘sorcerer’!

topic:CJ Corona made the Palace a counter offer to get

“off the hook”

Submitted on 2012/03/16 at 7:18 am | In reply to johnny
lin. point made yesterday re: SALN filing was that being ‘mala
prohibita’ good faith is not a defense for such
violation. a public official therefore who fails in any manner
cannot interpose a defense of good faith. a violation is
a violation of the constitutional ‘duty’ for full
disclosure. enrile further stated that ‘ feigning innocence
(ignorance) of a law is not an excuse. he said it in
latin ‘ignorantia legis neminem excusat’.

Submitted on 2012/03/16 at 7:33 am | In reply to Den
corona shamelessly banners the words ‘rule of law’ in his
streamer. what it really means by that is ‘rule of
lawyers’.let us not forget that it was the SC which
invited public scrutiny by the following acts:
1. the ‘midnight appointment’ is a clear violation on
‘equal application’ of law for all. by making a
questionable exemption the corona faction violated the
‘rule of law’.
2. the issuance of a TRO made highly discretionary
despite the presence of an opposition from the DOJ,
without giving sec. de lima adequate time to explain.
another glaring transgression on the sub-rule on ‘the
rule of law’. that the exercise of discretion must
necessary show compliance with all its requirements.

Submitted on 2012/03/16 at 3:30 pm | In reply to popeye.
i don’t know how mr. vicente could build a house in his
name if the title of the property remains with the
corona’s. the building permit must also be in the name of
the coronas just like any other receipts issued for real
property taxes…unless it was an illegal construction.
one need not look beyond the title of the property in
order to establish its true ownership as against the
whole world…all the evidence presented would make mr.
vicente a caretaker after stating that he no longer had
any other means of income after the purchase of the land.
as it looks now, cristina appears to have a better right
than the is open to double sale..what is
puzzling is the trust he holds for cristina who is not
even trusted by her own relatives of BGEi…not exactly
having a refutation for trustworthiness..
Submitted on 2012/03/16 at 3:54 pm | In reply to
Pinoyparin. why would someone filing a SALN go trough the trouble of
knowing a propety’s assessed value for taxation purposes
when one could easily tell from one’s memory as to the
cost in which a property was acquired? 2M, 5M. 10M. or
14M are easily recalled from memory when filling up the
spaces provided for..and the law does not require an
exact value to the last centavo. ‘de minimis’ was the
legal term to establish an error that was totally
accpetable in the court of law.

topic:2012 Political Forecast: “Something unexpected” in

the Year of the Black Water Dragon

Submitted on 2012/03/16 at 7:05 pm | In reply to baycas.
yun meralco case scandal sa CA between Sabio(ateneo-
utopian) and Roxas(a UP-sigmarhoan)..pero yung anak ni
Sabio ay opus deihindi kaya itong Utopian aligned sa
Vatican? but then the INC confirms nor denies a corona

topic:Lawyer willing to lend Mr Vicente cash to transfer

Corona property to his name

Submitted on 2012/03/17 at 10:14 pm
the nat’l. building code(PD1096) provides:
Section 302. Application for permits.
In order to obtain a building permit, the applicant shall
file an application therefor in writing and on the
prescribed form from the office of the Building Official.
Every application shall provide at least the following
(1) A description of the work to be covered by the permit
applied for; (2) Certified true copy of the TCT covering the lot on
which the proposed work is to be done. If the applicant is
not the registered owner, in addition to the TCT, a copy
of the contract of lease shall be submitted;
(3) The use or occupancy for which the proposal work is
intended; (4) Estimated cost of the proposed work.
i’m not familiar as to how marikina does its business but
if what ‘bobbie’ said was true(that a tax declaration was
sufficient for building permits) then that would amount
to an ‘extending legislation’ which is not allowed by

topic:A curious set of transactions surround McKinleyHill purchase for Charina

Submitted on 2012/03/30 at 6:04 pm
after all, what kind of father with ‘extra ordinary
means’ would not provide for a daughter who is doing a
‘PT’(joked too often on care-givers as “pahid-taeh”) in
the land of the dollar! though in this case its Physical
Therapy, which does not pay as much a doctors doing
Rehabilitation Medicine. this explains the ‘dual job’
deployment from the defense team. im still awaiting a direct query from friend in LA as to
pay range. then it would just be a matter of accounting.
my bet is..charina can’t afford these purchases with the
rent and being married with two kids. all the more if the
hubby is not gainfully employed and merely does menial
tasks such as gardening and the real ‘PT’ job.
now the picture is getting clearer with each stroke of
raissa’s keyboard! as i read through the articles lines. i sensed a very
‘incisive’ manner (of) journalism. all hands to you and godbless your website ms. raissa

topic:Take your pain and turn it into something wonderful, girls

Submitted on 2012/04/01 at 2:06 am
this reminds me of an uncle who got a whacking in the
butt from the father rector’s cane.
years later he would confide to me with the words. ” i
got a raw deal from the Jesuit’s!”
his offense, being the valedictorian of the class, was
inviting the graduating class from an exclusive for
girl’s school to a ball. Their class president was also
his girlfriend. they had a wonderful time that night. the following day.
little did they expect that they became the talk of the
town. it turned out to be a town scandal! he was promptly
called the following morning and got his punishment
without any proceedings. that was many years ago and time has changed.
as to the girls in bikini, time will change. maybe it
will take many years. my question is, was it really that
obscene as to arouse the prurient interest of the viewer?
hence the resulting penalty? on second point, these gilds are minors and cannot be
held administratively liable by an institution. i should
also say that the entire affair was mishandled. from the
school to the court. privacy should have been invoked.

Submitted on 2012/04/01 at 12:14 pm

Submitted on 2012/04/01 at 12:58 pm | In reply to Tomas
Gomez III.
i agree..FB rules should have been respected. accounts
are personal and private matters. if the STc admin are
proven to have used social engineering to hack into these
accounts then they may be held liable for violating
privacy rules.

Submitted on 2012/04/01 at 2:56 pm | In reply to rochie.
i’m not sure if it is a form of sarcasm or something. if
you do a specific search of IMAGES on Google for “STC
cebu girls”, an array of images appears. this one caught
my attention aside from the girls in bikini with faces
edited. it said STC_teachers_in_bikini then declares ” o
ano wala bang papalag?”

Submitted on 2012/04/01 at 4:48 pm | In reply to kardozoo.
illustration of what the last sentence in my comment at
April 1, 2012 12:42pm says. i am quite amused because my elem group (5 boys, inc my
hubby, and 6 girls) will have a 3-day frolic in boracay
in early may. as early as now, we are kidding each other
as to what to wear on the beach- and we are already
60ish. i don’t want our picture to look like the one in
your link because our children might raise a howl. baka
pigilan na kami ng mga anak namin na bumarkada sa mga
childhood friends namin. hehe!

Submitted on 2012/04/02 at 1:45 pm | In reply to rochie.
that would at least be worth a good laugh! just kidding…
i bet there are proper outfits for such an occasion.
fashion designers are not necessarily forbidden from
venturing into this area. neither is it considered taboo.
in fact i saw one recently it was about Caribbean
cruises. they featured outfits which i thought was
pleasant despite the models’ being advanced in years.
it’s just a matter of taste, i guess…admittedly. not
everyone has that. and they definitely ain’t bikinis.
good luck on that one!

Submitted on 2012/04/02 at 2:21 pm | In reply to Emilie
now the STC nuns just did a de-Lima act.
if we go to the very basic of things, schools are there,
created by law. teachers exercise ‘parental’ authority
into very specific places and situations such as the
campuses or field activities duly sanctioned by the
institution. these are all undertaken in the absence of
the parents or guardians. if during the time these acts committed by the students
were done under parental authority then where does
liability lie? does school authority cross these lines
and over-rule real parental authority? i don’t think so.
reality of the presence of authority is determined by
liability of the person in authority to damages committed
by minors during said ‘out-of-school-activity.
here, the line is drawn clearly because it limits
authority. it determines ‘who pays’ for damages.
maybe it answers the question if indeed there was an
over-reaching or a high handed exercise of authority.
as to the defiance to the TRO: injunctions are issued by the court to preserve a status
quo and not to dispose of the merits of a case filed in a
court of law. it appears to me that its issuance was not
proper. it opens the judge who ordered the TRO liable to
pay damages through an administrative case.
to avoid litigation, nuns did a shortcut.

Submitted on 2012/04/03 at 2:45 pm | In reply to Hannah.
They were inside a hotel room. The photographs were
obscene and sexually provocative. STC said it could
release the photos but chose not to because they want to
protect the dignity of the five students.
oh really, and how would you define ‘obscenity’ and
‘sexually provocative’? i think those are highly relative things. there is no
basis for this as a public statement. you cannot withhold
the photos because they are the basis for sound
decisions. one cannot form opinions by mere hearsay. it
just makes you a ‘tool’. what is provoking for the religious may not be
necessarily so for the general public. if it aroused
prurient desires in them then that is their problem.
the term provocative would also be in the same class. not
all women are blessed with features that can really
provoke. like they say, its either you are born with or
without it. there’s nothing you can do about it.

Submitted on 2012/04/04 at 4:41 pm | In reply to desper.
indeed, ‘mrs. crumplebottom’ has her own set of values.
its a reality one has to live with.

Submitted on 2012/04/04 at 11:59 pm | In reply to
a graduating student in the last month of HS deserved to
be expelled? was she notoriously undesirable or was it a
first offense in all the years? i don’t really think that
would be commensurate to the offense when reprimand would
have been sufficient. where on earth is it a crime to have some cool clean fun
with friends? lets say they drank some wine which
loosened their inhibitions. having a party in some place.
was it possible to them to exercise caution due to an
existing signed school policy? quite impossible. that
would be the last thing in their would be
perfectly natural. just like what raissa said, some of them would roll their
skirts up soon as they were out of the campus gates. what
more in this case when they were under parental
authority. maybe STC admin was so unbending with their rules that
the mother decided to take it to the bar of ‘public
opinion. her pleadings must have fell on deaf ears.
school policies are basically contracts of adherence and
may be struck down by the courts under a proper case when
found to be grossly unreasonable.

Submitted on 2012/04/10 at 2:14 pm | In reply to araceli.
yea, can i friend you girls on FB?

Submitted on 2012/04/10 at 2:21 pm | In reply to
may parusa yun, diba yun isang pari na may nude pics of
kids in his pc pinapatago nila dito sa PH(allegedly)? di
yun na ang parusa sa kanya. tago-ng-tago. parang fugitive
from justice!

Submitted on 2012/04/11 at 10:01 am | In reply to
confessions done without the presence of counsel are not
valid admissions. they do not constitute as a valid
waiver of rights. thats just what basic due process
requires. yes, i would like to see the photos and decide for

Submitted on 2012/04/12 at 5:18 pm | In reply to wawa.
marami sa mga students ay ‘absent-minded’ kaya
nakakalimutan i-silent mode o i-off” ang cellphones. ito
kadalasan ang kinaiinisan(pet-peeves) ng mga teachers
habang nasa classroom. para walang gulo, pinagbabawal
itong dalhin. reasonable naman ang patakaran na yan kung nasa classroom
pero hindi yata sa campus.

Submitted on 2012/04/12 at 6:34 pm | In reply to johnny
why? did you get whacked in the butt?
as for me, i had my share of mischief. the Jesuits were
kind to me. i was ordered to attend early morning mass in
the school chapel for a week followed by counseling by
the celebrating priest after the mass. it was a most
wonderful moment. the first taste of the host dipped in
the wine!

topic:Rosa Rosal: A woman for others

Submitted on 2012/04/04 at 7:37 pm
She has been equally firm when asked to run for public
office: “The Red Cross has to be neutral.”
was she ever consulted re: dick gordon’s appointment?
guess not…

topic:Henry Sy, Sr. would have stopped the cutting of Baguio’s pine trees

Submitted on 2012/04/12 at 6:42 pm
god save the trees!
after all, the sovereign people of Baguio owns these
trees. rescind the sale and take back the property.
government is just a caretaker for these property.

Submitted on 2012/04/14 at 11:02 am | In reply to raissa.
boycott SM!
that’s the way to hurt insensitive
hitting at their revenues.
maybe that way they will listen.
if only trees could talk!
” i believe that sense exists in a microbe as well as in
a tree”– l.i.kahn ( one of Americas greatest architects)

topic:Corona told Palace reporter Mia Gonzalez his dad was a BIR official

Submitted on 2012/04/17 at 12:20 pm | In reply to andrew
yes, i agree. the same may be presumed when the sale of
the lot to manila city hall was made. the secretary to
the mayor was also his classmate. that’s undue influence.
no wonder they got a good price from what was originally
a council resolution for expropriation to a negotiated
price of 32M. the mayor exercising highly discretionary
powers by using engineering funds in addition to what was
budgeted by the council. which brings us back to the CJ’s declaration, ” hindi ako
nakialam dun sa property ng misis ko”.
funny and sad!

Submitted on 2012/04/17 at 12:27 pm | In reply to Guy

With A Blog.
on (3): knowingly accepting a position under questionable
circumstances. i consider an acceptance of an offer to
drink of a cup of ‘hemlock’. hence, there’s nobody to blame but himself. not hacienda
luisita, not the communist, not the justice who is
interested in his job, not a politician who has a pending
case in the SC.

Submitted on 2012/04/17 at 1:00 pm | In reply to gray_c.
baka naputol lang yung wire ng radyo ng lola niya.
possible naman na inayos nya yun. madali lang naman mag
dugtong ng wire at say 8yrs. old..maybe 12.
but as to my talents…i was a toy wrecker at that age!

Submitted on 2012/04/17 at 1:20 pm | In reply to
radioactive balut.
hahaha! this is really funny. the CJ took up Mgmt.Eng’g. because
he was good in tinkering with things and he actually
thought that it was an engineering course!
mind you, Mgt.Eng’g. is a mathematically demanding
course. my sister backed out of it and settled with b.s.
economics instead.

Submitted on 2012/04/17 at 2:01 pm | In reply to tess.
it was not a case. the chief justice at that time,
narvasa refused to convene the JBC for the reason in CJ
appointment scenario.the decision on CJ appointment would still await a new
controversy for the SC to be given a chance to clean some
shit stuck in its ass. until then…it will be another SC.
it will be another time

Submitted on 2012/04/18 at 2:09 pm | In reply to
this is the bar of public opinion and not a regular nor a
special court. hence it is not bound by judicial rules
nor doctrines.
here, gut feel rules!

Submitted on 2012/04/18 at 2:17 pm | In reply to aces

we all know, the CJ is not good in math.
that’s proven by his SALN.
did he finish the M.E. course?
i hope he did not apply for the board exams with the PRC
to become a licensed engineer!

p.s.: many thanks to ms. raissa for facilitating the  transmission/retrieval of data for this post.

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

updates: notes on remedial law

a series of posts on provisional remedies and special civil actions. an attempt at manifesting into words what would be years of study into a few pages. though i would prefer less words if that was possible. remedial law being the most difficult of subjects relies heavily on actual court practice or what we call decided cases-as in jurisprudence.

the purpose of publication is to allow commentaries but not too many of these are expected considering the nature of the rules of court. some judges may even lag in updating their knowledge. i have heard of magistrates inquiring in counsels basis for pleadings only to find out that their rules of court are outdated. they are not static but rather dynamic compilations hence the need for community peer to peep interactions.

as we have learned, the rules of court or remedial law in general serves as the vehicle, conveyor, transporter, or any fitting term for that matter, for substantial law which is understood as statutory, like republic acts, executive orders, council resolutions, and what have you.

click HERE for first post(session i).

click HERE for 2nd post(session ii).

Tuesday, April 3, 2012

revisited: kaneva-virtual worlds


...a world i built years ago as a beta-tester. do visit the place if you happen to be around. click  HERE to access SITE.

..and please don't forget to hangout in the game room..


Sunday, March 25, 2012

places: mayacabac, dauis, bohol

my grand father left a piece of real estate in mayacabac,dauis, panglau island in bohol. 

he left the island as a young man when he decided he did not want to be a fisherman all his life. he would eventual retire as a municipal treasurer in the province of zamboanga del sur.

at the rates the resorts in the island are going (unconfirmed 50k for a nights stay). the small piece of common property is a gold mine.

in the municipality of Panglau, an american citizen was able to acquire a piece of property where a cave was located. it also had a 'balete' tree that scared the children around the neighborhood (Filipino folklore is rich with stories of 'encantos' and the supernatural). what the person did, i was informed, was to convert the cave into a bar with a swimming pool. this is just one of the things that make the place famous.

Monday, March 12, 2012

events: observations on the corona defense

these are some of the observations noted with regard to the conduct of the accused chief justice's defense at the resumption of the proceeding from the five day break in order to give time for the defense to prepare for its deliberations:

1. as an initial salvo, the defense lead cuevas employs evasive tactics by questioning the manner in which the impeachment court (IC) proceeded to trial from the articles of impeachment by the lower house. attacking in effect the IC and threatening to go to the SC on grounds of grave abuse of discretion.

citing francisco v. house of representative cuevas expressed the option as a relief from the situation. enrile however, stated that the case does not fall on all fours since it never reached the senate.

bernas had a more fitting metaphorical description of it. he said it was "like beating a dead horse". hmmm...a dead horse in the legal battleground! 

 2. defense through counsel manalo and rep.tiangco expounds on the internal working of the House of Representatives (HR) postulating that the impeachment on corona was politically motivated. this is glaringly unfair considering the judicial privilege invoked by the SC in its feb.14 Valentine Resolution where they even prohibited any employee of the judiciary to testify without an approval from the court 'en banc'.

the IC however chose to be liberal on the matter enforcing the rule on admission of evidence that their consideration for relevance be left to the IC within its internal deliberations.

related readings:
g.r. no. 160261-separate opinion by corona
g.r. no. 160261-separate opinion by tinga

Wednesday, February 29, 2012

doctrines: judicial privilege

If the doctrine on executive privilege is nothing but a constitutional myth then judicial privilege is a mythical monster against the freedom of information enshrined in Article III on the Bill of Rights of the '87 Philippine Constitution.

The charter expressly provides: " SEC. 7. - The right of the people to information on matters of public concern shall be recognized. Access to official records, and to documents, and papers pertaining to official acts, transactions, or decisions, as well as to government research data used as basis for policy development, shall be afforded the citizen, subject to such limitations as may be provided by law."

There are no known exceptions as far as i know except that the demand for information should not burden the bureaucracy in the manner of preparation with regard to matters of public record demanded by its citizen. We are after all in the 'age of information' and technology is the tool in which the right is sufficiently served.

That was before Ermita v. Senate came. There are also qualified exceptions towards state secrets with regard to the 'security of the state'. 

However, in the Supreme Court, where citizens invoke its adjudicative power with regard to controversies to enforce a right that was violated, the beast just doesn't square off.

In addition, a party litigant may invoke to keep the record of a decided case in private and not be a part of the public records but which is of course a different matter as this matter has got something to do with the individual's right to privacy. It is not something that the court may invoke. It is not the right of the court.

        code on information
        lord bingham on the rule of law

Monday, February 27, 2012

events: corona impeachment


art. VII of the impeachment charge questions the manner in which a TRO was issued in favor of the former president GMA.

i find the following excerpt on the rule of law elucidating with regard to its due execution:
      " My second sub-rule is that questions of legal right and liability should ordinarily be resolved by application of the law and not the exercise of discretion. Most modern commentators would not share to the full Dicey’s hostility to the exercise of official discretions. In the immigration field, for example, judges have routinely and gratefully invited the Secretary of State to exercise his discretion to grant leave to enter or remain to applicants who do not meet the tests for entry laid down in the immigration rules but whose personal history or circumstances demand  sympathetic consideration. But the essential truth of Dicey’s insight stands. The broader and more looselytextured a discretion is, whether conferred on an official or a judge, the greater the scope for subjectivity and hence for arbitrariness, which is the antithesis of the rule of law.25 This sub-rule requires that a discretion should ordinarily be narrowly defined and its exercise capable of reasoned justification. These are requirements which our law, in my opinion, almost always satisfies, because discretion imports a choice between two possible decisions and orders, and usually the scope for choice is very restricted. The grant of a civil injunction, it is always said, is discretionary. But if a clear violation of legal right is shown, and there is a clear risk of repetition injurious to the victim for which damages will not compensate, and there is no undertaking by the lawbreaker to desist, the trial judge ordinarily has no choice. His discretion can only, usually, be exercised one way. A second, very familiar, example is found in section 78(1) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, which provides:

      “In any proceedings the court may refuse to allow evidence on which the prosecution proposes to rely to be given if it appears to the court that, having regard to all the circumstances, including the circumstances in which the evidence was obtained, the admission of the evidence would have such an adverse effect on the fairness of the proceedings that the court ought not to admit it.”

The use of the word “may” is relied on as conferring a discretion. But what the subsection does, I suggest, is to require an exercise of judgment, which may be difficult to make but which will determine the outcome: if the statutory condition is judged to be satisfied, the judge must refuse to allow the evidence to be given; if it is not, the subsection does not authorise the judge to exclude the evidence. For my third illustrative example I return to the immigration field. If an official were to grant leave to enter or remain to a person who did not meet the tests laid down in the immigration rules, but whose case presented no exceptional features whatever suggesting the need for special treatment, such decision would be incapable of rational justification and could not be defended as an exercise of discretion. There is in truth no such thing as an unfettered discretion, judicial or official, and that is what the rule of law requires."

granting that there was sufficient compliance with the requirements...primordial executive concerns through the Department of Justice should not have been easily dismissed. After all, situational realities, real dangers, possible adverse results are things which are well within the executive branch's' domain of certainty-determination.  not the courts' which by nature is insulated from the ever changing  realities of day to day-realities which are deemed- from moment to moment- uncertain.

      lord bingham on the rule of law