1998 Press Releases can be found at the Archive Section.
|
 MIRIAM
ON TODAY'S ISSUES: PORK BARREL, JIMENEZ EXTRADITION (7 Feb 2000) |
MIRIAM
ON TODAY'S ISSUES:
7 February
2000
PORK BARREL
It
might be unconstitutional to require the "prior concurrence" of, or "prior
consultation" with, Congress members before funds of the DPWH, DECS, and
other offices are released.
The Constitution provides that the only condition for paying money out
of the Treasury is an appropriation made by law. Giving Congress members
the power to concur or to be consulted, is tantamount to adding another
condition not found in the Constitution.
In effect, the result is to give a Congress member the power to veto or
at least to harass the process of releasing funds. It would be a rich
source of corruption.
In my view, this clause might amount to an unconstitutional impoundment
of duly appropriated funds. More specifically, it would be unconstitutional
"reverse impoundment" by Congress, because impoundment is usually done
by the President, as in the US. The US Supreme Court has ruled that impoundment
is unconstitutional.
For these reasons, I voted "no" on the budget.
JIMENEZ EXTRADITION
The
US state department memorandum is absolutely correct under international
law. Ours is the only Supreme Court in the world to give an extraditee
the right to demand copies of the evidence against him, even before the
start of the extradition trial.
In effect, the Supreme Court majority has defied international law as
it stands today. It has already raised eyebrows around the world, causing
the international community to emit a collective gasp.
Jimenez should simply go to trial. His best bet under international law
is to raise the defense that he is a political offender, and therefore
exempted from extradition. He might want to use my book, Political
Offences in International Law. In any event, this Supreme Court ruling
is like waving a red flag in front of a bull.