Karma is not an argument

Herbie Gomez .

WE are missing the point if we think that the Elipe-Quizon cases were all about the money. The more the public discussion on the now decided cases is muddled when some  unsophisticated thinker from Timbuktu starts comparing the amount involved in the twin cases with undecided or dismissed cases.

First, the amount involved in the Elipe-Quizon cases was only a little over P1,800, and so, one doesn’t need to be knowledgeable on rocket science to figure out that there was something more to the cases than money matters. The cases were about turning a blind eye to a wrongdoing and the glaring abuse of power by the one who wielded it to aid another (in this case, a sister) in faking a public document in order to beat the system.

Second, there is no comparison between the Elipe cases and any of the cases against other Cagayan de Oro politicians, past or present. I submit that the amount involved in the Elipe-Quizon cases was incomparable to the other cases. But the big difference lies in the conviction. The other politicians were not or have yet to be convicted by the anti-graft court while ex-councilor President Elipe now holds the record of being the first former councilor of the city in recent memory to be convicted and slapped with a prison term for graft and public document falsification.

Understand that the Office of the Ombudsman is not a court and its resolutions should not, in any way, be confused with court convictions. Rather, the ombudsman is an investigator tasked to prosecute those it thinks committed graft and corruption while in power.

While the ombudsman exercises administrative powers to suspend, dismiss and bar from holding public office those it sees fit to be punished, it does not have the final say because it is not a court in the strictest sense of the word. And so, those the ombudsman decides to bring to the Sandiganbayan — which, by the way, is a real court — are “presumed innocent until proven guilty.” During trial, the burden of proving the guilt of those it prosecutes is on the shoulders of the ombudsman and its prosecutors.

Yet, “presumed innocent until proven guilty” may not be said now in the case of the Elipe siblings because the ombudsman already won a conviction. It is a fact now that prosecutors from the ombudsman’s office succeeded in convincing the anti-graft court that two crimes were committed by the ex-councilor and his sister Pristine Quizon.

It is not the end of the world however for the Elipe siblings unless they accept with all of their heart and soul the Sandiganbayan decision, but that is going to be an unthinkable scenario. Thank God (that is a metaphor) for “due process,” they can still appeal their case, assail the Sandiganbayan decision, and ask the higher courts to reverse the anti-graft court’s ruling. But this time, the burden of proof no longer lies on the shoulders of the prosecutors but on the Elipe siblings whose problem now is how to prove that the ombudsman and the anti-graft court made a big mistake and that they are innocent.

In the process, the siblings cannot appeal their case and assert their innocence before the Sandiganbayan, the Court of Appeals or the Supreme Court by pointing out that the amount involved was only less than P2 thousand while there are others, accused of pocketing public funds by the millions, with undecided or dismissed cases. Again, the big difference is the court conviction. The siblings were found guilty “beyond reasonable doubt” by a competent court while the others were not. And, so, there is no point of comparison.

The Elipe siblings cannot cite undecided or, worse, dismissed cases of other politicians to argue and punch holes in the Sandiganbayan ruling. That would be like saying, “We should not be sent to prison because other crooks who ran off with bigger loots were not.” That, in a way, would be an admission of the commission of a much lesser crime, which is still a crime from any angle one looks at it. That is not good reasoning, and if they did that, their appeal would be outrightly trashed. Such an amateurish and cry-baby defense would be dismissed pronto.

Neither can they go to court with a sweeping accusation that the Sandiganbayan was bought without showing solid evidence. It’s quite easy to cast aspersions on institutions like the Sandiganbayan to save face until the accuser is challenged to give details and is confronted with names. In the Elipe-Quizon case, the Sandiganbayan ruling was handed down by Associate Justice Reynaldo Cruz and concurred by Associate Justices Alex Quiroz and Bayani Jacinto. So, let me ask: Exactly how were Associate Justices Cruz, Quiroz and Jacinto bought, and who bought the judges?

In the end, one can wish other people, including the associate justices, bad karma. But, then again, there is no undisputable proof that karma is real. It is an idea of something that’s supernatural, and an assertion of the extraordinary that requires extraordinary evidence. Wishing another bad karma is simply nothing more than wishful thinking. One cannot go to court with the threat of bad karma. It is a stupid man’s weak assertion, the weakest defense, in fact, any hyper-emotional fool can resort to.

But if any karma-believing wimp out there really wishes to be stupidly superstitious about the twin Elipe-Quizon cases, might I suggest that the siblings avoid “18,” and anything and anyone associated with that number. I note that Elipe served six full three-year office terms as a councilor of Cagayan de Oro from the Magtajas up to the Moreno administrations or a total of 18 years. Then he got slapped with an 18-year imprisonment sentence for two crimes that involved a measly P1,800. So, there you go, “18.”

By the way, my personal opinion is that an 18-year jail time is too harsh a punishment. Given that the amount is only P1,800, that’s like a year in prison for every P100.

But in court and during trial, irregularities and superstition aside, only facts and good old fashioned reasoning matter. How the Elipe siblings would attempt to overthrow the Sandiganbayan decision with facts and reason is something that’s really going to be interesting. Methinks the siblings should really consider changing lawyers. A really good lawyer may just do the trick. In the meantime, pastilan.