A sitting President can be arrested

Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has a new reason to be nervous -- sitting presidents are not immune from arrests for committing criminal offenses. This is the legal milestone set by the International Criminal Court (ICC) when it ordered the arrest of Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir for war crimes and crimes against humanity in a concerted government campaign against civilians.

International Herald Tribune reports:

The criminal court judges took more than seven months to examine the evidence on Bashir before charging him with five counts of crimes against humanity, including murder, extermination, forcible transfer, torture and rape. The two counts of war crimes were for attacks against a civilian population and for pillaging.

In their statement, the judges said the court did not recognize immunity for a head of state and called for the cooperation of all countries - not just the 108 nations that are members of the court - to bring Bashir to justice.

Under the rules of the UN charter and Security Council, Sudan is legally obliged to arrest Bashir, the judges said - but that appears unlikely. The court has no police force or military of its own, and the 24,000 or so UN peacekeepers operating in Sudan have no mandate to detain war crimes suspects.

If this is the case, and human rights groups are able to substantiate the claims against Gloria Arroyo for human rights violations and for suppression of press freedom, then she might find her feet treading the path to jail.

Yun nga lang, medyo malabo na. First, elections are near, barely one year. Kung hindi siya ma-impeach, hindi na rin siya presidente in case ICC issues a warrant of arrest against her. Second, Lorelei Fajardo will surely fire verbal ammunitions against ICC calling the act the work of opposition and the issuance of the warrant of arrest politically motivated. (Un)Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales will also let loose his unbridled tongue to delay the proceedings while FG Mike Arroyo will gather another crowd in EDSA to be airlifted to The Hague to show protests.

Pero sabi, ang protests na gagawin ni FG ay pagtutol sa proceedings ng ICC regarding the criminal cases of his wife. Ang gusto niya daw kasi na talakayin ng ICC ay annulment case dahil wala na rin siyang pakinabang sa asawa niya kung mawawala na ito sa pagiging presidente. Isa pa, wala nga daw na nagawa si Gloria sa ZTE-broadband issue eh pumayag na nga siya na pumunta si Gloria sa Boao kahit pa nasa emergency room siya at may sakit.

Philippines, Piracy and Property Rights

My trip to Quiapo (no, not patterned after Ricky Lee's scriptwriting manual) remains vivid in my head as the songs of the tinderos and tinderas kept going: Dibidi... dibidi... dibidi.

Naalala ko tuloy ang balita kahapon. Gusto ng mga pharmaceutical lobbyists sa America na bigyan ng economic sanctions ang Pilipinas dahil sa Cheaper Medicines Act ng huli. Violation daw yun ng intellectual property rights (IPR) ng mga malalalaking pharmaceutical companies. Pumirma kasi ang Pilipinas sa isang kasunduan under the General Agreement on Tariff and Trades with regard IPR.

Pero kung may punto nga ang mga American lobbyists, ibig sabihin, kailangang mahal ang mga gamot. Ibig ding sabihin, kung ang isang mahirap ay magkakaroon ng karapatan na maka-afford ng gamot para sa isang malusog na pangangatawan ito ay isang violation din ng IPR. Ibig ding sabihin, ang tanga-tanga talaga ng mga Pilipino dahil ibinoboto ng mga ito ay mga opisyal na basta na lang pumipirma ng mga hindi naiintindihan na dokumento. Buti na lang merong Gloria Arroyo na matapos sumabog ang balita na negatibo sa bansa ang implikasyon ng ZTE Broadband Deal, minadyik na lang para mawala ang mga dokumento. Galing di ba?

Pero isang malinaw na implikasyon din ang kahalagahan ng amendments sa Konstitusyon - amendments na hindi lang basta "able to read and write" ang kandidato kundi "able to understand" din ng kanyang binabasa at sinusulat.

But while we agree sa karapatan ng mga nag-isip, nag-imbento, gumawa, nag-develop, etc., ng mga bagay-bagay (gamot, pelikula, damit, musika atbp.), dapat gumawa rin ng paraan ang gobyerno para hindi naman lahat pabor sa mga may-ari ng IPR. Ang trabaho ng gobyerno ay balansehin ang mga interes at gumalaw patungo sa ikauunlad ng bawat isa. Puwedeng isa ang Cheaper Medicines Act pero huwag naman sanang maging bahag ang buntot ang gobyerno pag umalma na ang ibang bansa. Ikalawa, huwag lang tumutok sa gamot. Tutukan din ang iba pang bagay tulad ng Free and Open Source Software (FOSS) Bill na hanggang ngayon, nasa drawer pa rin ng mga kongresista. Matagal na ata yun na nai-file pero mukhang hanggang filing cabinet na lang.

Ikatlo, tutukan din ang mga smuggler na kasabwat ng ilang tao diyan sa gobyerno. Mukha kasing ang nangyari, everybody happy lagi at naging "customary" na ang snuggling. Kung may hinuhuli man, ito yung maliliit at mahihina mag-coordinate. Ganun nga ba talaga yun?

Siyempre, lagyan ng pangil ang mga batas. Huwag ng gawin yung slogan ni Erap na "walang kai-kaibigan at walang kama-kamag-anak" kasi may lusot dun. Wala na ngang kaibigan (kaya nga umalma si Jun Lozada dahil kumonti ang kita), at wala na ring kamag-anak kasi panay na lang "kapamilya". Otherwise, bakit sinasabing "all roads of corruption lead to Rome... este, Home... I mean, Malacanang"?

Merceditas and the ethics of lawyers

Q: Do you know the reason why lawyers cannot enter directly either the heaven or the hell?
A: Because they keep on questioning the guidelines of St. Peter.


But kidding aside, lawyers have this Canon of Professional Ethics which they need to follow "that the public shall have absolute confidence in the integrity and impartiality of administration of justice." And Merceditas Gutierrez is a lawyer before becoming an Ombudsman. But it seems that her breeding is not of a lawyer as she personally lashed back at her critics who followed the rules and filed an impeachment complaint against her ... o lawyers lang ang dapat sumunod sa Canon of Professional Ethics?

Kung sabagay, why should we expect kay Merceditas to be following the Canon eh simpleng argumentum ad hominem hindi niya nga alam na fallacy pala. But even then, her speech makes a very good comic show. Here's the take from Inquirer.Net: