For somebody who has to read all the national broadsheets every morning before going to the 365 Club at Hotel Intercon, seeing something else in the front pages of newspapers other than those sickening political intrigues is refreshing.

Take for instance that raging controversy between Vicki Belo and Boy Abunda. The former, of a well-known cosmetic dermatology clinic, took a swipe at a rival clinic of Manny and Pie Calayan saying that if you want to look like Piolo Pascual or Dingdong Dantes (Belo endorsers), go to her clinic. But if you want to look like Boy Abunda (an endorser of the Calayan clinic), go to Calayan.

From my point of view, Belo didn?t insult Abunda. She didn?t say Abunda, a host of ABS-CBN, was ugly. In any case Belo already apologized to Boy. The problem, however, is that this bit of entertainment intrigue has spilled over the long-time rivalry between ABS-CBN and GMA-7 with the stable of each network now taking up the cudgels between the two.

This is not only entertaining. It?s a much-needed departure from the sickening news that media peddle to us, day in and day out, politics. Santa Banana, I bet you more people read this Belo-Abunda controversy than all those endless, never-ending and time-consuming investigations of scams and anomalies in Congress without anybody ever being prosecuted, much less convicted and sent to jail.

***

A panel of investigators has recommended to the Supreme Court en banc that retired Supreme Court Justice Ruben Reyes be sanctioned for leaking an unpromulgated ponencia over the citizenship issue between Negros Oriental Rep. Jocelyn Limkaichong and the wife of former Rep. Jacinto Paras.

The Supreme Court en banc said that as a result, Justice Reyes should pay P500,000 out of his P4.5-million retirement benefits and banned from holding any position in government. There was even a threat that Reyes could be disbarred.

All we have read from the newspapers recounting the circumstances behind the Supreme Court en banc findings that Reyes was responsible for the leak because there was ?circumstantial evidence? and that when asked about the leak, ?Reyes was evasive.?

I still would like the Supreme Court to state publicly: under what circumstances did the panel find Reyes guilty as charged? What motive could Reyes have in leaking the draft of his ruling? What could he gain from it? As a lawyer, I am trained to find out what motive people have in doing what they do.

It?s thus under these circumstances why I believe Reyes deserves to be heard in an open court to rebut the charges against him not only for the sake of transparency, but more importantly, in the interest of fair play and justice. It?s the anchor of justice?due process?that needs to be observed.

If those Court of Appeals justices had their day in court after they were charged with dishonesty and bribery by an independent panel, I believe Justice Reyes, who has served in the judiciary for over 35 years, deserves no less.

My gulay, it?s not only the reputation of a retired justice and his family at stake, but also the integrity of the Supreme Court as the Court of Last Resort at risk. The core of the issue is due process, which the high court must observe.

***

I?m glad some senators are now realizing that when they endorsed the ?Right to Reply? bill sponsored by Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel, they committed a mistake.

They committed a mistake not as a result of the universal uproar of Philippine media over the repercussions of the bill, which seems to be railroaded by both chambers of Congress. An analysis of the proposal would not only constitute prior restraint in press freedom but could lead to ridiculous ends.

The senators, thus far, who are withdrawing from Pimentel?s bill are Chiz Escudero and Mar Roxas. As I write this column, there were others like Alan Peter Cayetano and his sister Pia.

Pimentel, the main author of the proposal, claims that there?s need for both private and public individuals to exercise their right to reply as a form of freedom of expression when charged, accused and criticized.

Everybody indeed has the right to reply to anything. That?s guaranteed by the Constitution. And I can understand why public officials have to reply when some irresponsible members of media accuse and criticize them, rightly or wrongly.

The problem is that in pushing for the right-to-reply bill, Pimentel et al. want to legislate responsibility, for that?s the core of this issue. It lumps the responsible and true professionals in the press with the irresponsible and abusive.

But those abused by irresponsible sectors of media are not totally helpless. They have the libel laws to protect them. And insofar as media is concerned, responsible media must stick to the truth, facts and be fair with malice towards none.

My gulay, if the right-to-reply bill becomes a law, the newspapers will have nothing else to publish but replies and answers to criticisms and accusations, and will be flooded with nothing else but replies and answers to replies and answers. There will be no end to this insanity!

***

People have been asking why Senator Mar Roxas, who has been crowned the Liberal Party candidate for the presidency in 2010, has been ranking low in poll surveys.

I, myself, am baffled with the results of surveys on Mar because I see in him a serious contender for the presidency.

The only explanation I can think of is that the ?masa? that constitute the greater bulk of the people see him as an elitist and associated with the rich and affluent like the Aranetas of Cubao.

As far as I?m concerned, Mar has all the qualities of a president needed to address our economic and fiscal problems in the wake of a global financial meltdown. He was an investment banker, and, more importantly, he has not been associated nor linked to any scandal.

However, as I see it, Mar?s drawback is that as a senator he?s neither here nor there. In effect, Mar has an image the greater bulk of people cannot associate with. Yes, he has been a critic of President Arroyo but so are so many in the opposition trying to grab the limelight.

Another question comes to fore: Will his marriage to long-time girlfriend Korina Sanchez be a plus factor in Mar?s candidacy? My answer is both yes and no.

Filipinos are suckers when it comes to romance. They love lovers, just as they forgave Erap Estrada for his many dalliances. That?s the plus side. But, on the minus side, many also see Korina as a negative factor. Even Mar?s ?Mr. Palengke? brand doesn?t seem to work.

Thus, if Mar can take an unsolicited advice, his propagandist and PR machinery would do well to market him with a brand to make people identify with him. With 15 months before the May 2010 polls, there?s time to change Mar?s image.

***

On another score, why is former Senate President Manny Villar leading other presidential hopefuls in poll surveys?

The reason as I see it is that because of his poor and humble beginnings, the ?masa? tend to identify with him. Villar doesn?t need branding because he was actually a poor man, and through patience and hard work, and good luck in marrying a rich Aguilar, he can now afford to spend for his presidency. As they say, in politics, it?s the golden rule that prevails. Translated: ?He who has the gold rules.?

And Villar and his handlers know how to take advantage of his money and his poor beginnings. He pays for the travels of abused overseas Filipino workers, and now has a film clip identifying him with a small duck farmer. That identifies him with the poor.

As for charges that he took advantage of his position for personal gain, well, that still has to be proven. But, as of now, as I see it, Villar leads the pack. Things may change, though, in the months to come.