EDITORIAL - Let the courts decide
August 9, 2001 | 12:00am
Senators are politicians, and their acts will always be tainted with politics. This is why its folly to entrust the investigation of criminal acts to the Senate, no matter how much the senators cry that the probe is in aid of legislation. Already, the charges hurled by the military intelligence chief against Sen. Panfilo Lacson have taken on a political tone, with members of the opposition accusing the administration of conducting a de-molition job against the former Philippine National Police chief.
Col. Victor Corpus, chief of the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, has accused Lacson of massive money laundering together with his wife Alice as well as deposed President Joseph Estrada and his wife, Sen. Luisa Ejercito. A newspaper columnist has accused Lacson of worse crimes including multiple murder. Lacson has defended himself in a privilege speech, denying chiefly Corpus claims.
If Lacson wants his innocence established conclusively, however, the Senate is not the proper venue. No matter how many privilege speeches he makes, no matter how loud the noise his opposition allies make, only the courts can clear his name. And if he wants to seek redress, he can also sue his detractors.
The government, for its part, should file charges in court if it has enough evidence against Lacson. Public funds financed the sleuthing by ISAFP personnel for Lacsons purported bank accounts overseas. If the sleuthing unearthed solid evidence, a formal complaint must be filed. Mere prima facie evidence will earn Lacson an indictment and the case can then be tried by a proper court.
In the age of texting and the Internet, its so much easier to indict a person in the court of public opinion. Lacson, however, can end up winning in this court if his detractors fail to back their claims with substantial evidence. Its also easy for the Senate to pounce on every controversy and launch an investigation ostensibly in aid of legislation. But it could merely end up muddling a criminal investigation. It is in the interest of both sides in this controversy to take their case to court a real one.
Col. Victor Corpus, chief of the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, has accused Lacson of massive money laundering together with his wife Alice as well as deposed President Joseph Estrada and his wife, Sen. Luisa Ejercito. A newspaper columnist has accused Lacson of worse crimes including multiple murder. Lacson has defended himself in a privilege speech, denying chiefly Corpus claims.
If Lacson wants his innocence established conclusively, however, the Senate is not the proper venue. No matter how many privilege speeches he makes, no matter how loud the noise his opposition allies make, only the courts can clear his name. And if he wants to seek redress, he can also sue his detractors.
The government, for its part, should file charges in court if it has enough evidence against Lacson. Public funds financed the sleuthing by ISAFP personnel for Lacsons purported bank accounts overseas. If the sleuthing unearthed solid evidence, a formal complaint must be filed. Mere prima facie evidence will earn Lacson an indictment and the case can then be tried by a proper court.
In the age of texting and the Internet, its so much easier to indict a person in the court of public opinion. Lacson, however, can end up winning in this court if his detractors fail to back their claims with substantial evidence. Its also easy for the Senate to pounce on every controversy and launch an investigation ostensibly in aid of legislation. But it could merely end up muddling a criminal investigation. It is in the interest of both sides in this controversy to take their case to court a real one.
BrandSpace Articles
<
>
- Latest
- Trending
Trending
Latest
Trending
Latest
By IMMIGRATION CORNER | By Michael J. Gurfinkel | 1 day ago
By AT GROUND LEVEL | By Satur C. Ocampo | 2 days ago
Recommended
December 23, 2024 - 12:00am