PART II "YOU" Beware of the "Court of Public Opinion"

COMMENTARY

“YOU”

BEWARE OF THE

 “COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION”

PART II

“THE RULE OF LAW”  versus

“THE RULE OF PUBLIC PERCEPTION”

Ka Leon Estrella Peralta with his

Supporters from  the “Masa” Sector

         The issuance of an Indefinite Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) by the Supreme Court on the matter of CJ Corona alleged Dollar Accounts at PS Bank, Katipunan Branch by “Rule of Law” is debatable.  However, when the “Rule of Public Perception” is use as a yardstick is absolutely non-debatable on the proceeding issue.  Majority of the “People Judges” of the "Court of Public Opinion” perceived this issued indefinite TRO as a squid tactic of the defense panel to allegedly hide CJ Corona’s “Dollars.”  Sabi nga nila (People Judges), “Kung walang tinatago, bakit ayaw ilabas?”

      By “The Rule of Law” the one who accuses has the burden of proof rests on his shoulders while by “The Rule of Public Perception” the one being accused has the burden of proof rests on his shoulders or has the burden of proving that he is not guilty as alleged.

      The actual Impeachment Trial of CJ Corona now being heard by the impeachment court uses the “Rule of Law.” That is the reason why the House Prosecutors constantly request subpoenas to help them prove the guilt of CJ Corona, in consonance to the legal maxim, that the ones accusing have the burden of proof rests on their shoulders.  After each and every Impeachment Trial, the spokespersons of the prosecution as well as the spokespersons of the defense virtually face the “Court of Public Opinion” being heard and presided by the “PEOPLE JUDGES”, who now use the “Rule of Public Perception” in which the one being accused of has the burden of proof rests on his shoulders or has the burden of proving that he is not guilty as alleged. Actually both camps resorted to this kind of “TRIAL BY PUBLICITY” for they know the importance of public opinion that would be elicited from the “People Judges” of the “Court of Public Opinion.”

      In view of the foregoing, CJ Corona is perhaps “winning” his initial battle in the Impeachment Court in the matters of eliciting and blocking documentary evidences against him by the Prosecution Panel and Defense Panel respectively. However, the issuance of the Indefinite Temporary Restraining Order by the Supreme Court in the matter of alleged CJ Corona’s “DOLLARS” is perhaps losing his war in the “Court of Public Opinion.” By virtue of the legal effect of “The Rule of Law” probably, CJ Corona be adjudged “not guilty” by the Impeachment Court at the end of the impeachment trial, but definitely he would perhaps be losing his war in the “Court of Public Opinion.”

              A “Point of Thought” for the Defense Panel and Defense Spokespersons,

“You may win the battle but 
you may lose the war”

          CJ Corona probably might retain his position as still, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court because of the stringent legal parameters and maxims of the “Rule of Law” relative to the aforementioned Impeachment Trial.  However,  by the “Rule of Public Perception”, he would be forever be adjudged “GUILTY” for not divulging to the “People Judges” of the “Court of Public Opinion” on matters of his alleged Dollar Deposits and this “GUILTY VERDICT” would hound him and his family forever. So, . .  .

“YOU”

BEWARE OF THE

“COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION”

         A “POINT OF ADVICE” for the defense, “You better open the alleged CJ Corona’s dollars while you still have time and opportunity during the Defense Presentation in the Impeachment Trial, for victory is much sweeter when “You have won both the battle and the war.”

By  Ka Leon Estrella Peralta

       Founding Chairman

    Political and Human Rights Advocate

________________________________________________________

Special Note:

       The above COMMENTARY entitled “YOU”, BEWARE OF THE “COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION” PART II – THE RULE OF LAW VS. THE RULE OF PUBLIC PERCEPTION“ is in relation to the opinion expressed by the author during the Kapihan Forum at Annabel’s Restaurant February 11, 2012 to the Defense Spokespersons’ Atty. Karen Jimeno and Atty. Rico Paolo  R. Quicho who were present among others.

 ________________________________________________________