There is another thing about the case filed against Senator Ping Lacson that tends to show how the DOJ of the past administration did everything in seeming haste and with an eye for a "deadline".
The case filed against the original accused in the Dacer-Corbito case was "Double Murder".
The case filed against Senator Ping Lacson in the Dacer-Corbito case was "Two Counts of Murder".
Nobody can argue that it was one and the same case. But why the difference?
Well, the DOJ did a legal maneuver by calling it "Two Counts of Murder" as it applied to Senator Lacson. That was because at the start of their preliminary investigation against Ping, they claimed IT IS A DIFFERENT CASE. Why would they do that?
Had they admitted at the time that it is ONE AND THE SAME CASE, as Ping's lawyer contended, the DOJ would have to seek a LEAVE OF COURT before conducting the preliminary investigation against Ping. That means they would spend more time before they could file the case against Ping. They would not be able to complete everything before the Arroyo administration stepped out of Malacanang and a new president took over. So they held on to the position that it is a DIFFERENT CASE and proceeded with their preliminary investigation WITHOUT LEAVE OF COURT.
But once the preliminary investigation was completed and a DOJ resolution was submitted to the court, the DOJ went along with the position of Ping's lawyer that it is ONE AND THE SAME CASE and that the case filed against Ping ought to be CONSOLIDATED WITH THE ORIGINAL CASE. That is why we can call it a legal maneuver. A sort of DIRTY TRICK that was consciously employed.
Remember when we were kids, a boy used to hold a flower in his hands, muttering as he removed its petals one by one: "She loves me, she loves me not, she loves me, she loves me not....."?
The DOJ did the same thing quite quickly: "DIFFERENT, THE SAME"!
Sunday, January 9, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
The Real Issue: Probable Cause
Probable cause or bare suspicion?
1. Can uncorroborated testimony be accepted as probable cause?
2. Can hearsay be accepted as evidence in court?
3. Can "non-sequitur" be a valid argument for proving an allegation?
4. Is the head of a police unit responsible for criminal acts of people under his command?
5. Does the inconsistent testimony of one person carry more weight than the consistent testimony of three witnesses?
The answer to every question above is NO. Therefore, there is no probable cause to charge Senator Ping Lacson for the murder of Dacer and Corbito.
Mancao said he heard a conversation inside a car. But he told everyone about it nine years after the alleged conversation took place, with "guidance" from the DOJ panel, with the threat of extradition and criminal prosecution hanging above his head.
Nobody except himself says that he heard such a conversation. If the two people talking inside the car were so careless in talking about a plot to murder somebody, it stands to reason that they should also be careless in talking about it in some other place, in front of some other people.
That letter that Dacer wrote to Estrada maligning Ping. If that is evidence against the maligned person, that would seem to be a perverted way to look at evidence. There is no proof that Senator Ping Lacson knew about that letter until Dacer disappeared.
The letter plus the tale of the Dacer sisters that their father pointed to Ping as the one responsible in case something happens to him are all unrelated to the disappearance of Dacer and by any stretch of imagination cannot be taken as evidence that Ping wanted Dacer dead.
If command responsibility is defined as being responsible for every illegal or criminal act of every person under your command in a police organization, all our police officers would be in jail right now.
Three people - Dumlao, Aquino and Oximoso all said Ping is innocent of this crime. Only Mancao says so and he was recorded as saying in the past that he was being pressured or enticed to fabricate charges against Ping. His recall of when the event inside the car took place proves he was not telling the truth. Taking for granted that there was really a conversation, he admitted he may not have heard everything right.
Justice equates to truth. It cannot be used to uphold untruth.
1. Can uncorroborated testimony be accepted as probable cause?
2. Can hearsay be accepted as evidence in court?
3. Can "non-sequitur" be a valid argument for proving an allegation?
4. Is the head of a police unit responsible for criminal acts of people under his command?
5. Does the inconsistent testimony of one person carry more weight than the consistent testimony of three witnesses?
The answer to every question above is NO. Therefore, there is no probable cause to charge Senator Ping Lacson for the murder of Dacer and Corbito.
Mancao said he heard a conversation inside a car. But he told everyone about it nine years after the alleged conversation took place, with "guidance" from the DOJ panel, with the threat of extradition and criminal prosecution hanging above his head.
Nobody except himself says that he heard such a conversation. If the two people talking inside the car were so careless in talking about a plot to murder somebody, it stands to reason that they should also be careless in talking about it in some other place, in front of some other people.
That letter that Dacer wrote to Estrada maligning Ping. If that is evidence against the maligned person, that would seem to be a perverted way to look at evidence. There is no proof that Senator Ping Lacson knew about that letter until Dacer disappeared.
The letter plus the tale of the Dacer sisters that their father pointed to Ping as the one responsible in case something happens to him are all unrelated to the disappearance of Dacer and by any stretch of imagination cannot be taken as evidence that Ping wanted Dacer dead.
If command responsibility is defined as being responsible for every illegal or criminal act of every person under your command in a police organization, all our police officers would be in jail right now.
Three people - Dumlao, Aquino and Oximoso all said Ping is innocent of this crime. Only Mancao says so and he was recorded as saying in the past that he was being pressured or enticed to fabricate charges against Ping. His recall of when the event inside the car took place proves he was not telling the truth. Taking for granted that there was really a conversation, he admitted he may not have heard everything right.
Justice equates to truth. It cannot be used to uphold untruth.
Common Sense
For people who use their common sense, the following should be obvious by now:
1-The Dacer sisters filed a complaint against Ping, believing that he knows something about the murder of their father, even if in their hearts and minds, they probably do not believe it was Ping who wanted their father killed. They want Ping to tell them who the real mastermind is. But it is not Ping's obligation to them to solve the murder case, and the method they are employing to make him do it is most foul.
2-The previous DOJ filed the complaint against Ping, as part of an evil conspiracy to get even with him because of his strong stand against graft and corruption during the previous administration wherein he earned the ire of those in power. They themselves know there is no case against Ping. They only want him to suffer. It is vengeance and not the quest for justice that moves them.
3-Mancao executed a written affidavit against Ping which is full of holes and inconsistencies to protect himself from prosecution as an accused in the murder case. As Dumlao said, Mancao does not know anything about this murder case but unlike Dumlao, Mancao has a weak character. He is a shame to the Phil Military Academy.
4-Ping has not surfaced because it would be extreme injustice to be jailed for a crime someone did not commit. Everybody and his uncle knows Ping will not be convicted of this crime because the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. But who wants to sit inside a prison cell for ten or fifteen years, as in the case of Hubert Webb, only to be pronounced not guilty after consummation of all court proceedings?
1-The Dacer sisters filed a complaint against Ping, believing that he knows something about the murder of their father, even if in their hearts and minds, they probably do not believe it was Ping who wanted their father killed. They want Ping to tell them who the real mastermind is. But it is not Ping's obligation to them to solve the murder case, and the method they are employing to make him do it is most foul.
2-The previous DOJ filed the complaint against Ping, as part of an evil conspiracy to get even with him because of his strong stand against graft and corruption during the previous administration wherein he earned the ire of those in power. They themselves know there is no case against Ping. They only want him to suffer. It is vengeance and not the quest for justice that moves them.
3-Mancao executed a written affidavit against Ping which is full of holes and inconsistencies to protect himself from prosecution as an accused in the murder case. As Dumlao said, Mancao does not know anything about this murder case but unlike Dumlao, Mancao has a weak character. He is a shame to the Phil Military Academy.
4-Ping has not surfaced because it would be extreme injustice to be jailed for a crime someone did not commit. Everybody and his uncle knows Ping will not be convicted of this crime because the evidence is not only weak; it is fabricated. But who wants to sit inside a prison cell for ten or fifteen years, as in the case of Hubert Webb, only to be pronounced not guilty after consummation of all court proceedings?
Wednesday, December 22, 2010
Two Officers And A Gentleman
Both Glenn Dumlao and Cezar Mancao are graduates of the Philippine Military Academy. Among PMA'ers, a simple "All Right Sir" is sufficient to assure another that he is telling the truth. They are supposed to hold on to the truth, regardless of consequences. Not to be influenced by threat, intimidation, duress or inducement or enticement true PMA'ers can hold their heads up and say that their conduct conforms to the PMA motto of "Courage, Loyalty and Integrity"
We have two officers who are considered witnesses in connection with the Dacer Corbito murder case filed against Senator Ping Lacson. BUT WHO BETWEEN THE TWO IS THE GENTLEMAN UP TO THIS DAY?
Glenn Dumlao's May 2003 affidavit:
"On June 4, 2001, I was arrested by some members of the PNP. From June 4, 2001 until June 12, 2001 and while under involuntary detention, I was forced to draft and redraft affidavits that would link P/SUPT MICHAEL RAY AQUINO,
P/SUPT CESAR MANCAO and SEN. PANFILO LACSON to alleged illegal activities. Several tactical interrogations were conducted on me by different PNP and AFP officers. These tactical interrogations were regularly attended by threats, intimidation, and physical force to coerce me to concede to their demands."
"P/SUPT MARCELO GARBO also interrogated me. He wanted me to include in my affidavit his list of illegal activities (e.g., drug-trafficking, kidnapping, robbery/hold-up) – all contained in a two-page document – allegedly participated by me with SEN LACSON as the brain behind it. The same list was also subject of P/SUPT GEORGE GADDI’s tactical interrogation."
"Despite the threats, intimidation and physical force, there were times that I gathered enough courage to express my objections to my interrogators demands. At one time, I reminded P/SUPT GADDI that we have worked together with PAOCTF, and on account thereof, he personally knows that these claims are not true. There was also a time when P/SUPT ROLANDO ANONUEVO witnessed me pleaded to P/SUPT BERROYA to spare innocent people from these baseless and false accusation."
GLENN DUMLAO REPEATEDLY SAID IN COURT AND IN VARIOUS INTERVIEWS THAT SENATOR PING LACSON IS INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES FILED BY THE DOJ AGAINST HIM IN CONNECTION WITH THE DACER CORBITO MURDER CASE.
Cezar Mancao's Interview with Ted Failon, August 12, 2008:
Q: Dacer-Corbito case, pending AW, nililigawan ka raw ni Col. Prestoza? A: September nagsimula yun. Tinawagan niya ako dito sa bahay na ito, itong teleponong gamit ngayon, nagpakilala siyang siya si Romy Prestoza, bagong halal na PSG chief sa panahong yan. Binigay niya sa akin ang kanyang cell phone number at nag-offer sa akin
Q: Anong offer?
A: After niya magpakilala, sinabihan niya akong siya ay bagong halal, bagong appoint na PSG chief. Sabi niya masyado raw maingay si Sen. Lacson, parang asong ulol, gusto niya patahimikin. Gusto niya akong
gamitin, in-offer-an nila ako at buong pamilya ko na manirahan sa Singapore. Lahat na kailnagan ko provide nila.
Q: Paano siguro na si Col. Prestoza?
A: Nahaba ang kanyang introduction sa akin. Alam niya yung operations namin noon nagsimula kay Joey de Leon noong 1992, ano pa ang ibang operation kasama kami, PMAer sa PMAer malalaman mo kung totoo o hindi. Pero mga facts na tinatanong ko sa kanya nasasagot niya katugma sa ine-expect kong sagot
Transcript of Mancao's Hearing, Sept 10, 2009:
Q: Alright so you admit it was not you who personally prepared this affidavit, it was prepared by a panel of DOJ and you just signed this affidavit is that correct?
A: I signed it to the truthfulness of the contents, Sir.
Q: Yes, but it was not you who prepared this affidavit, correct?
A: Personally I was not the one who typed, I was material to drafting
the affidavit, Sir.
Q: Whose computer was used mr. witness if you can still remember?
A: I don't know the ownership.
Q: Did the panel of prosecutors give inputs in preparing this affidavit?
A: Guidance, Sir.
Transcript of Mancao's Hearing, Sept 17, 2009:
Q: Is it not a fact that a certain General Prestoza called you and made you some
offers regarding your testimony or for you to make a testimony against certain
personalities that are being implicated in this case, Correct?
A: I don't know the person on line. Identified himself as then Colonel Prestoza. Yes.
Q: But eventually, Mr. Witness, you were able to find out that the one who called you
was a certain General Romeo Prestoza. Is that correct, Mr. Witness?
A: He was then a colonel, Sir.
Q: And then he belongs to the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines?
A: At that time, no, sir.
Q: Is he a member of Presidential Security Group, Mr. Witness?
A: He was duly appointed as the Chief of Presidential Security Group, sir.
Q: Is it not a fact that during that time he called you and asked you to testify and implicate Senator Panfilo Lacson in exchange for relocation to Singapore, Mr. Witness.
A: No Sir.
Q: In exchange for some benefits such as reinstatement to the Philippine National Police?
A: Promises were made as to relocation of my family, reinstatement to the police force, in order for me to fabricate some issues against now Senator Lacson at that time when we had a conversation over the phone, sir.
CEZAR MANCAO SIGNED AN AFFIDAVIT IMPLICATING SENATOR PING LACSON. HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT WAS THAT THE ALLEGED CONVERSATION THAT THE DOJ USED TO INCRIMINATE PING IN THIS CASE HAPPENED AT THE TIME WHEN THEN PRES. ESTRADA WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY (FROM SEPTEMBER UP TO EARLY OCTOBER), FORGETTING THAT SENATOR PING LACSON WAS TRAVELLING WITH THE THEN PRESIDENT AT THE SAME TIME.
RECENTLY HIS LAWYER ATTY TOPACIO FILED A STATEMENT IN COURT SAYING THAT MANCAO'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE CRIME WAS EX POST FACTO OR AFTER THE FACT.
We have two officers who are considered witnesses in connection with the Dacer Corbito murder case filed against Senator Ping Lacson. BUT WHO BETWEEN THE TWO IS THE GENTLEMAN UP TO THIS DAY?
Glenn Dumlao's May 2003 affidavit:
"On June 4, 2001, I was arrested by some members of the PNP. From June 4, 2001 until June 12, 2001 and while under involuntary detention, I was forced to draft and redraft affidavits that would link P/SUPT MICHAEL RAY AQUINO,
P/SUPT CESAR MANCAO and SEN. PANFILO LACSON to alleged illegal activities. Several tactical interrogations were conducted on me by different PNP and AFP officers. These tactical interrogations were regularly attended by threats, intimidation, and physical force to coerce me to concede to their demands."
"P/SUPT MARCELO GARBO also interrogated me. He wanted me to include in my affidavit his list of illegal activities (e.g., drug-trafficking, kidnapping, robbery/hold-up) – all contained in a two-page document – allegedly participated by me with SEN LACSON as the brain behind it. The same list was also subject of P/SUPT GEORGE GADDI’s tactical interrogation."
"Despite the threats, intimidation and physical force, there were times that I gathered enough courage to express my objections to my interrogators demands. At one time, I reminded P/SUPT GADDI that we have worked together with PAOCTF, and on account thereof, he personally knows that these claims are not true. There was also a time when P/SUPT ROLANDO ANONUEVO witnessed me pleaded to P/SUPT BERROYA to spare innocent people from these baseless and false accusation."
GLENN DUMLAO REPEATEDLY SAID IN COURT AND IN VARIOUS INTERVIEWS THAT SENATOR PING LACSON IS INNOCENT OF THE CHARGES FILED BY THE DOJ AGAINST HIM IN CONNECTION WITH THE DACER CORBITO MURDER CASE.
Cezar Mancao's Interview with Ted Failon, August 12, 2008:
Q: Dacer-Corbito case, pending AW, nililigawan ka raw ni Col. Prestoza? A: September nagsimula yun. Tinawagan niya ako dito sa bahay na ito, itong teleponong gamit ngayon, nagpakilala siyang siya si Romy Prestoza, bagong halal na PSG chief sa panahong yan. Binigay niya sa akin ang kanyang cell phone number at nag-offer sa akin
Q: Anong offer?
A: After niya magpakilala, sinabihan niya akong siya ay bagong halal, bagong appoint na PSG chief. Sabi niya masyado raw maingay si Sen. Lacson, parang asong ulol, gusto niya patahimikin. Gusto niya akong
gamitin, in-offer-an nila ako at buong pamilya ko na manirahan sa Singapore. Lahat na kailnagan ko provide nila.
Q: Paano siguro na si Col. Prestoza?
A: Nahaba ang kanyang introduction sa akin. Alam niya yung operations namin noon nagsimula kay Joey de Leon noong 1992, ano pa ang ibang operation kasama kami, PMAer sa PMAer malalaman mo kung totoo o hindi. Pero mga facts na tinatanong ko sa kanya nasasagot niya katugma sa ine-expect kong sagot
Transcript of Mancao's Hearing, Sept 10, 2009:
Q: Alright so you admit it was not you who personally prepared this affidavit, it was prepared by a panel of DOJ and you just signed this affidavit is that correct?
A: I signed it to the truthfulness of the contents, Sir.
Q: Yes, but it was not you who prepared this affidavit, correct?
A: Personally I was not the one who typed, I was material to drafting
the affidavit, Sir.
Q: Whose computer was used mr. witness if you can still remember?
A: I don't know the ownership.
Q: Did the panel of prosecutors give inputs in preparing this affidavit?
A: Guidance, Sir.
Transcript of Mancao's Hearing, Sept 17, 2009:
Q: Is it not a fact that a certain General Prestoza called you and made you some
offers regarding your testimony or for you to make a testimony against certain
personalities that are being implicated in this case, Correct?
A: I don't know the person on line. Identified himself as then Colonel Prestoza. Yes.
Q: But eventually, Mr. Witness, you were able to find out that the one who called you
was a certain General Romeo Prestoza. Is that correct, Mr. Witness?
A: He was then a colonel, Sir.
Q: And then he belongs to the Intelligence Service of the Armed Forces of the Philippines?
A: At that time, no, sir.
Q: Is he a member of Presidential Security Group, Mr. Witness?
A: He was duly appointed as the Chief of Presidential Security Group, sir.
Q: Is it not a fact that during that time he called you and asked you to testify and implicate Senator Panfilo Lacson in exchange for relocation to Singapore, Mr. Witness.
A: No Sir.
Q: In exchange for some benefits such as reinstatement to the Philippine National Police?
A: Promises were made as to relocation of my family, reinstatement to the police force, in order for me to fabricate some issues against now Senator Lacson at that time when we had a conversation over the phone, sir.
CEZAR MANCAO SIGNED AN AFFIDAVIT IMPLICATING SENATOR PING LACSON. HIS TESTIMONY IN COURT WAS THAT THE ALLEGED CONVERSATION THAT THE DOJ USED TO INCRIMINATE PING IN THIS CASE HAPPENED AT THE TIME WHEN THEN PRES. ESTRADA WAS OUT OF THE COUNTRY (FROM SEPTEMBER UP TO EARLY OCTOBER), FORGETTING THAT SENATOR PING LACSON WAS TRAVELLING WITH THE THEN PRESIDENT AT THE SAME TIME.
RECENTLY HIS LAWYER ATTY TOPACIO FILED A STATEMENT IN COURT SAYING THAT MANCAO'S KNOWLEDGE OF THE CRIME WAS EX POST FACTO OR AFTER THE FACT.
Tuesday, December 14, 2010
Hasty and Malicious Prosecution
"The opt-repeated purpose of a preliminary investigation of a criminal complaint is to serve the innocent against hasty, malicious, and oppressive prosecutions, and to protect him from open and public accusation of crime, from the trouble, expenses and anxiety of a public trial, and also to protect the State from useless and expensive prosecutions." (Hashim vs. Boncan, 71 Phil. 216 quoted in O. Bernardo's Criminal Procedures Annotated Fifth Edition page 62)
Let us have a look at how the case against Senator Ping Lacson progressed:
March 27, 2009
The daughters of Salvador Dacer filed a Complaint Affidavit with the DOJ against Senator Lacson
October 26, 2009
Senator Lacson filed a Counter Affidavit. The complainants manifested that they would file a Reply-Affidavit at the hearing on December 1, 2009. Senator Lacson manifested that he would file his Rejoinder-Affidavit and any other evidence on December 18, 2009.
The complainants later manifested that they no longer intended to file a Reply Affidavit and moved that the case be submitted for resolution.
The DOJ panel issued an Order cancelling the Dec 1 and 18 settings and denied a motion for reconsideration filed by Senator Lacson, thereafter issuing its Resolution dated December 18, 2009 finding probable cause against Senator Lacson for two counts of murder.
Was Senator Lacson accorded due process? Was his right as accused trampled upon by the DOJ panel?
It looks like Senator Lacson was not given enough opportunity to controvert the evidence of the complainant against him.
Let us have a look at how the case against Senator Ping Lacson progressed:
March 27, 2009
The daughters of Salvador Dacer filed a Complaint Affidavit with the DOJ against Senator Lacson
October 26, 2009
Senator Lacson filed a Counter Affidavit. The complainants manifested that they would file a Reply-Affidavit at the hearing on December 1, 2009. Senator Lacson manifested that he would file his Rejoinder-Affidavit and any other evidence on December 18, 2009.
The complainants later manifested that they no longer intended to file a Reply Affidavit and moved that the case be submitted for resolution.
The DOJ panel issued an Order cancelling the Dec 1 and 18 settings and denied a motion for reconsideration filed by Senator Lacson, thereafter issuing its Resolution dated December 18, 2009 finding probable cause against Senator Lacson for two counts of murder.
Was Senator Lacson accorded due process? Was his right as accused trampled upon by the DOJ panel?
It looks like Senator Lacson was not given enough opportunity to controvert the evidence of the complainant against him.
The Legal Duty of Prosecution
"The law makes it a legal duty for the prosecuting officer to file the charges against whomsoever the evidence may show to be responsible for an offense. This does not mean, however, that they shall have no discretion at all; their discretion lies in determining whether the evidence submitted justify a reasonable belief that a person has committed an offense. What the rule demands is that all the persons who appear responsible shall be charged in the information, which implies that those against whom no sufficient evidence of guilt exists are not required to be included." (People vs. Enriquez, 220 SCRA 325, as quoted in O. Bernardo's Criminal Procedure Annotated, Fifth Edition page 6).
There is so much discretionary power in the hands of a prosecuting officer that the temptation for abuse is also great. When the rule was devised, the basic assumption must be that this duty will be performed with utmost impartiality and with the sole purpose of giving justice to everyone concerned - the victims or complainants and the accused alike. But what if this assumption does not appear to be true?
Senator Ping Lacson's case is one glaring demonstration of how the system did not work.
One uncorroborated affidavit by Cezar Mancao was all that the prosecutors needed to file the case in court.
They completely disregarded what Mancao said in two interviews several months before - that he was being enticed by somebody from Malacanang to implicate the senator in the Dacer-Corbito murder case.
They were in such a hurry to complete the preliminary investigation and file the case in court that they cancelled two scheduled hearings.
They selectively quoted portions of various affidavits but only those portions that would help their case against the senator, completely disregarding those portions which point to his innocence.
They simply disregarded the repeated statements of Glen Dumlao clearing Senator Lacson of any involvement in the abduction and murder of Dacer and Corbito.
They worked as if they were working on a deadline to put the senator behind bars before the Arroyo administration steps down from office.
Did the prosecutors perform their legal duty in Senator Ping Lacson's case?
I don't believe they did.
There is so much discretionary power in the hands of a prosecuting officer that the temptation for abuse is also great. When the rule was devised, the basic assumption must be that this duty will be performed with utmost impartiality and with the sole purpose of giving justice to everyone concerned - the victims or complainants and the accused alike. But what if this assumption does not appear to be true?
Senator Ping Lacson's case is one glaring demonstration of how the system did not work.
One uncorroborated affidavit by Cezar Mancao was all that the prosecutors needed to file the case in court.
They completely disregarded what Mancao said in two interviews several months before - that he was being enticed by somebody from Malacanang to implicate the senator in the Dacer-Corbito murder case.
They were in such a hurry to complete the preliminary investigation and file the case in court that they cancelled two scheduled hearings.
They selectively quoted portions of various affidavits but only those portions that would help their case against the senator, completely disregarding those portions which point to his innocence.
They simply disregarded the repeated statements of Glen Dumlao clearing Senator Lacson of any involvement in the abduction and murder of Dacer and Corbito.
They worked as if they were working on a deadline to put the senator behind bars before the Arroyo administration steps down from office.
Did the prosecutors perform their legal duty in Senator Ping Lacson's case?
I don't believe they did.
Law and Nature
I can find some similarities between law and nature. Nature is beautiful. It is God's creation. But man, over many ages, polluted the land, the waters and the air.
The law is beautiful. It is inspired by what is right and just. But some people, for selfish reasons mostly, prostitute the legal system and make it work for their own selfish ends.
There is nothing wrong with nature. There is nothing wrong with the law. It is man's greed, carelessness, apathy and lack of knowledge and understanding that destroys the beauty of both nature and the laws.
I believe that because of man's incapacity to take care of what is God-given, God Himself intervenes in His own majestic way. For polluting and destroying the environment, we are witnessing floods, poisoning of the atmosphere, rivers and the seas. For distorting and twisting the law, we are witnessing the corruption of people's minds and the triumph of evil in our midst.
When shall we ever learn?
The law is beautiful. It is inspired by what is right and just. But some people, for selfish reasons mostly, prostitute the legal system and make it work for their own selfish ends.
There is nothing wrong with nature. There is nothing wrong with the law. It is man's greed, carelessness, apathy and lack of knowledge and understanding that destroys the beauty of both nature and the laws.
I believe that because of man's incapacity to take care of what is God-given, God Himself intervenes in His own majestic way. For polluting and destroying the environment, we are witnessing floods, poisoning of the atmosphere, rivers and the seas. For distorting and twisting the law, we are witnessing the corruption of people's minds and the triumph of evil in our midst.
When shall we ever learn?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)