Monday, October 30, 2006

“suspension”

Suspension from office is now a reality that causes havoc in political circles. Local public officials are its targets specially those who are avowedly not pro-administration. Their followers rise up in avid protests. Hundreds of policemen are made to assume extraordinary tasks. Social order is disturbed.

Administrative and criminal cases filed against local public officials are the premise of their suspension. The accusations range from the so-called “ghost” employees, violation of contracts to malversation of public funds. That is why the already busy courts become even ore loaded with cases to resolve.

What is perplexing to ordinary citizens, simple but still thinking people is this: how so many and serious administrative and criminal issues are heaped upon the present national leadership, and yet this remain unaffected, unmoved, unsuspended—inspite of the now infamous triad of lying, cheating and stealing repeatedly heaped upon it.

Elementary logic finds it strange that the holder of the highest accountable office in the land is the most unaccountable public official in the country. This is one big reason why the holder of the highest public trust has become the most distrusted figure in the land.

The immunity from suit should precisely make the beneficiary thereof the paragon of honesty and integrity. It is certainly not meant for the public official to think, decide and act without qualm of conscience, without preoccupation with the principles of ethics, the dictates of moral, the provisions of law.

Even the unlettered, oppressed and poor have and retain their common sense. This is why they find it perplexing that they can be picked up, abducted or even killed for any concocted reason. Yet they witness graduates with doctorate degrees, holders of high public offices and the managers of the big public funds who are beyond the reach of law.

They were told that having less in life, they should have more in law. But they know better. Having least in life, the fact is they practically have nothing in law.


+OVCRUZ, DD
30 October 2006