DESPERATE ANTI-FM BURIAL TACTIC!

Nov. 17, 2016

DESPERATE ANTI-FM BURIAL TACTIC!

Here is a DESPERATE TACTIC AT NATIONAL MEDIA’S EXPENSE to delay, if not prevent, the burial of former President Ferdinand Marcos (FM) at the Libingan ng mga Bayani (LNMB) – A MEDIA BLITZ on anything that can CAST DOUBT on the legality or propriety of the event.

A story in philstar.com discussed in full detail a 76-YEAR-OLD conviction of FM for CONTEMPT OF COURT. Not just one, five or 10 but a 76-YEAR-OLD case. The story said the piece was by guys from UP Diliman. In inquirer.net, a story quoted Leni Robredo’s lawyer Romeo Makalintal as saying the burial can’t be implemented yet until the Supreme Court decision allowing it becomes final and executory due to pending motions for reconsideration. But Makalintal DID NOT IDENTIFY who filed the motions for reconsideration.  Read the stories for yourselves, guys.

But apart from all these, let me add, among others, the following: Makalintal is an ELECTION LAWYER. The burial is NOT an election issue. The writers of the philstar.com story are not even sure that contempt of court is a crime of moral turpitude which is a ground to ban FM from being buried at LNMB. The Supreme Court decision clearly stated that there is NO LAW which prohibits FM’s burial at LNMB,

Most of all, BOTH the philstar.com and nquirer.net stories WERE POSTED WITHOUT any comment or reaction from the Marcoses or their lawyers.  Despite the fact that a STANDING RULE in media is BOTH SIDES of the story must come out together. If the other side is not available, efforts by the media company to contact them MUST BE INDICATED IN THE STORY. I’m a former senior editor of a NATIONALLY CIRCULATED group of tabloids. I won’t pass judgment on inquirer.net and philstar.com But as far as I know, that rule HAS NOT BEEN ABOLISHED. Anybody correct me if I’m wrong. 30