Skip to main content

Winnie Monsod's Reaction Regarding the Supreme Court''s Decision on the Chiong Sisters' Case

I guess the rainy days really can make me remember the Chiong Sisters' sudden disappearance, right? Right now, Jeepney TV on YouTube hasn't uploaded the Chiong Sisters episode. I watched Give Up Tomorrow where one blatant opponent of constitutional reform, Mrs. Solitas G. Collas-Monsod, was there. I could think about her colorful descriptions that helped the video. Mrs. Monsod did present a lot of valid points such as the late Judge Martin Ocampo's colorful imagination of how Francisco Juan G. Larranaga aka Paco could just hire a plane, land in Cebu, do the dastardly deed, and fly to Manila like nothing happened. I could agree with Mrs. Monsod's statements but I'm still appalled at one thing--she's very anti-reform!

The video I'm sharing was most likely not included due to time constraints. However, it's a good thing that Michael Collins uploaded some of those scenes. These scenes included the owner of the house where the rape supposedly happened, the first lie which involved an illiterate woman signing an affidavit, and Paco's full speech which included his sympathy for the Chiong family. I could admire Mrs. Monsod's courage when she said, "I could be charged with contempt." and mention she has some speculation. She was right to call it a badly written decision.

What was the decision's basis that Paco was almost executed? It's because Paco didn't testify. However, Paco wasn't even allowed to testify on his behalf. The judge even ignored certain protocols such as allowing the forensic experts to verify if the body was indeed that of Marijoy Jimenea Chiong. I still stand by that it's really her. Later, the same judge treated the identity as irrelevant. The photos that were presented in court were questioned (and a certain Teresita Galanida, the one who questioned the photos, was later regarded as a bad joke according to the documentary), and how Paco was denied his right to testify. 

Mrs. Monsod even points out the first paragraph. I'm afraid a 2019 report from the Philippine Star says that reading comprehension in the Philippines is really that bad. Just check out how Filipinos tend to make comments and miss the point. Were those in the Supreme Court, at that time, acting like the social media idiots you have today? It's like people who don't understand what 100% FDI ownership is. They think that "Our country is being sold to China! It's Noynoy's/Duterte's gift to China." or "It's a loss of Philippine sovereignty." What they missed is that this 100% ownership means equity ownership. In short, FDIs don't need to find a local partner and get their equity limited to merely 40%. Instead, they can own 100% of their business (in terms of equity) while they're still required to pay rent, pay bills, and pay taxes. I felt that's how the Supreme Court, at that time, treated the documentary.

The irony of the situation is that Mrs. Monsod remains adamant against constitutional reform. I agree with what she said about the bad move of the Supreme Court of the Philippines at that time. However, what really makes me laugh is how she's still blatantly and adamantly anti-reform. Has she even failed to see the cause and effect? It's really funny (and irritating at the same time) when people say, "There's nothing wrong with the constitution. It's the people who are in it." The question is what allowed stupid politicians and appointees to rise up? Isn't it because the current constitution could care less even if somebody as stupid as Mr. Bean were president? If the person gets votes by plurality (such as the case of the late Benigno Simeon C. Aquino III and Rodrigo Roa Duterte) or majority (such as the case of Philippine President Ferdinand R. Marcos Jr.)--they're automatically the president. Even if the person is really stupid--popularity will put them in power.

I was reminded of the short reign of former Philippine president, Joseph Estrada, as well. It's because Estrada's secretary, Cheryl Salvaleon Jimenea, was an aunt of the two victims. Estrada was already known for being inept. Yet, Estrada won anyway because he got the most number of votes. If people could vote for people only because of popularity--that can provide a better explanation as to why the appointees in the judiciary end up the way they are. This reminds me that Mrs. Monsod is a graduate of the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. Yet, it seems that she can't see the need to amend the 1987 Constitution of the Philippines because of what happened. 

What's more interesting that Hilario G. Davide Jr. was also part of the Supreme Court at that time. Davide Jr. was also related by marriage to both the Chiong mother and her sister. Davide's spouse is Virginia Jimenea Perez-Davide. Interestingly, the Philippine Star also shares this information regarding the motion for reconsideration:

Supreme Court spokesman Esmael Khan has confirmed that the tribunal en banc presided by Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. denied the convicts’ motions to reverse its Feb. 3, 2004 decision because there was no new evidence to warrant its reversal.

One must ask what really allowed the denial of the motion of reconsideration? Khan himself had said that Davide Jr. denied the motion for reconsideration based on the regional trial that concluded on May 5, 1999. I'd say that it's pretty much cause and effect. Davide Jr. ended up saying, "There's no need to revise the 1987 Constitution. It's the best in the world." Take note that I'm paraphrasing what Davide Jr. just said. I wouldn't be too surprised if Kishore Mahbubani of Singapore would facedesk if he heard it. Both Mahbubani and Davide Jr. were former UN diplomats and may have met each other several times. Meanwhile, the Singaporean justice system is said to be among the best in the world.

Meanwhile, it seems that one of the Monsod children, Trina Monsod, may now be seeing things differently. Hopefully, this can be an illustration that it's not enough to point out what's wrong but to find out the root cause of it. 

Popular posts from this blog

What? The Aquinos Aren't Part of a Political Dynasty?!

  I was looking at the Mahal Ko Ang Pilipinas  (I Love the Philippines)  Facebook page, which made me laugh. This is what they wrote on their post saying that the Aquino Family isn't a political dynasty: THE AQUINO FAMILY IS NOT A POLITICAL DYNASTY 🇵🇭🎗 Pro-Duterte blogger Tio Moreno says that Bam Aquino is part of a political dynasty because the Aquino family is a political dynasty. But to me, this is not true. Why is it not true that the Aquino family is a political dynasty? 🤔 1. When Ninoy Aquino entered politics, none of his children joined him in his endeavors, and even his wife Cory did not join him in politics. 2. When Ninoy was assassinated in 1983, none of his children succeeded him in politics, not even his wife. But when the opposition and his supporters were looking to be the opposition's candidate for the presidency in the snap election called by Ferdie Marcos for 1986, his housewife Cory Cojuangco-Aquino was approached, encouraged or convinced by people t...

Shifting to the Parliamentary System is Better than Banning Political Dynasties

Some Filipinos who are totally against charter change (or constitutional reform) always use political dynasties as an excuse. It's not enough that some of them should keep saying that economic charter change will mean "selling the Philippines to foreigners". Please, if they realize it, developed countries allow 100% FDI ownership--allowing foreigners to own 100% of their business . Back on the topic, I would like to discuss political dynasties and why they're not necessarily bad . Some people keep talking about the anti-political dynasty law--that is one per family. It might be because they still think the first Marcos Administration was a parliamentary system. Please, evidence has been gathered that it was never a parliamentary system, to begin with (read here )!  It's easy to talk about political dynasties. Some people were citing President Ferdinand "Bongbong" R. Marcos Jr. as a member of a political dynasty. Some people also cite the Dutertes. I even...

Why I Think Banning the Mention of Hitler on Facebook is STUPID

Getty Images It's crazy how reporting a comment with the word "Hitler" can get anyone banned. For example, this is what I found on Quora : They should be allowed. there are quotes of his that are not in praise of hitler but showing how he thought so that people are critical of their current leaders . For example, here’s a quote by him “ How fortunate for governments that the people they administer don't think.” This is a perfect example of why Hitler quotes should be allowed; to show how dictators think and how people should be critical. Yes, he started a giant war and murdered people but censoring what he said will only help the next dictator start more wars and murder more people because people forgot about Hitler . This is why the First Amendment is so important: it’s about communication and freedom so that we all make better decisions in the future. I just told someone that Adolf Hitler seized the means of production and I got a strike. Like what? I wonder what ...

Filipinos Calling Indians as "Bumbay"

The song "Dayang Dayang" was given a parody cover called "Dayang Daya". Oftentimes, the song "Dayang Dayang" is thought to be Indian. Instead, it's arguably said to be from Muslim Mindanao or was brought in either from Malaysia or Indonesia. Historically, some of the settlers in the Philippines were Malaysians and Indonesians. So, it's probably safe to say that most Filipinos of brown skin descent are mixed Malay and Indonesian. I was even reminded how I mistook a Malaysian woman for a Filipino woman. Back on topic, the parody song has an introduction that says, "Kami Bumbay galing sa India..." (We're Bombay coming from India). I even tend to refer to Indians as Bombay--something I ended up tactlessly saying during my first trip to Singapore. Many times, Filipinos tend to use Bumbay not as a racial slur but to simply refer to an Indian. Some Filipino-Indians don't even mind being called Bumbay for a reason. I guess they got accust...

Double Ten Isn't Taiwan's Birthday

It's often a mistake for people to think that Double Ten is Taiwanese independence day. Actually, it was  December 7, 1949 , which was when Taipei became the capital of Taiwan. Instead, the real history of Double Ten can be  From the Taiwanese Community Center , we can read this interesting tidbit about Double Ten and why it still matters for Taiwan: So what is this holiday all about? October 10th is Taiwan National Day, but it is not Taiwan’s birthday.  Instead, it commemorates October 10, 1911, which was the start of an event called the Wuchang Uprising in China. This uprising led to the Xinhai Revolution which brought about the fall of the Qing (Ching) Dynasty, the end of the Chinese dynasties, and the founding of the Republic of China in 1912 .  At this time, Taiwan had been under the rule of the Empire of Japan since 1895, and i t was not until the end of World War Two in 1945 that Japan was forced to relinquish control of the island to the Republic of China . M...