Is Inhibiting One’s Self Wrong?
June 5th, 2008 at 12:41 am (General, Davao City)
In his Philippine Daily Inquirer column, Ramon Tulfo questioned our justice system.
Tulfo cited “a scion of the wealthy Villa Abrille clan of Davao City” who is accused of murder and pointed out that Davao City Prosecutor and his assistants have not filed a case against the “scion.” According to Tulfo, “city prosecutor, Raul Bendigo, said he was adopting a ‘hands-off’ stance because another member of the Villa Abrille clan, Antonio V. Tan, used to be his boss.”
Truth is, Bendigo inhibited himself from the case precisely because “he has a close relationship with the older members of the Villa-Abrille clan.” Our justice system, of which I am not a big fan of, allows prosecutors, judges, and other members of the judiciary to inhibit themselves from a case if the person may be biased or prejudiced towards the case or the personalities involved in the case.
I think Bendigo inhibited himself, not to save the suspect from prosecution. Rather, he inhibited to give the victims and their families an unbiased and fair case, hearing, and trial. If Bendigo didn’t inhibit himself, it would have cast doubt into the case and the trial.
I am not a lawyer, but in my opinion inhibiting one’s self is assurance that one will not let his own bias or relations affect how a case is heard and tried. Thus, I see nothing wrong with Bendigo’s inhibition. Bendigo actually filed an inhibition from the case, rather than just gave a “hands off” stance as Tulfo alleges.
Tulfo, also, apparently hasn’t been informed that cases have been filed against the suspect.
Related Posts:- Julius Babao, Pres. Arroyo, Dawud Santos and Jonathan Tiongco
- Still in a State of National Emergency
- How Dare We Forget People Power 2?
- Victimized
- Addicted to Power
davaoeno anonymous said,
July 3, 2008 at 6:06 pm
It only means that we Filipinos (Davaoenos) cannot separate intimacy with objectivity..This has a long history (corruption and other related practices).
The question should be, Is it just to “inhibit” oneself of a prosecution of a murderer because the prosecutor is intimate with the murderer? Does the “intimacy” outweigh the crime? The answer to that will be our Justice System. I cannot imagine the scenario if the superior of our very own city prosecutor also happens to be “closely-related”, and considers its influence, to such a prominent clan. Does it mean that the case will, in the end, be filed on the Supreme Court? What if the 15 justices are also closely-related to this clan; does “inhibiting oneself” still resembles justice? Should we pass this case to the prosecutors situated at Mars, where no one is related to this clan (probably)? One asks. Welcome to the despotism of Philippines (Davao) in this age of “democracy, liberty, and tolerance.”