Editorial

Outrageous liberty

A New York judge this week ruled that Bernard Madoff, the 70-year-old chairman of an investment securities firm who was arrested last month for fraud?and who had admitted that he had been running ?a giant Ponzi scheme? all along, duping his high-profile clients of an estimated $50 billion?could remain under house arrest. Not even Madoff?s mailing of jewelry and other valuables to relatives at a time when his assets were supposed to be frozen was a good-enough argument for the judge to send Madoff to jail.

What makes this case particularly interesting is that the ?house? in house arrest is a penthouse in the heart of Manhattan. This means that while Madoff cannot go anywhere he pleases, he continues to enjoy the luxury of the home he has built from the fortunes of others.

Clients, prosecutors, businessmen and even Madoff?s neighbors are outraged. A New York resident says a vendor of fake designer bags can easily be put behind bars; the charges Madoff is facing are exponentially more damaging. But since the decision was the sole prerogative of the judge, the only recourse is to appeal the decision.

Closer to home, a Makati judge yesterday dealt a six-to-12-year jail sentence to former Batangas Gov. Antonio Leviste. Leviste was found guilty of homicide for the killing of his long-time aide, Rafael de las Alas. Judge Elmo Alameda threw out the former governor?s claim that he shot De las Alas in self-defense. Nobody corroborated his defense; moreover, evidence on the crime scene showed who among the two men was the aggressor.

The judge, however, did not agree that Leviste plotted to kill his associate.

Now comes lawyer Henry Capela, Leviste?s counsel, saying that they will immediately appeal the decision and pray for the temporary liberty of his client pending review.

We assume Capela knows his law and at least has a basis for asking the court to allow his just-convicted client to post bail while awaiting the results of the appeal. The thought of a convicted killer, however, remaining free just because of a pending motion for reconsideration is revolting. Even if that convict were a high-profile personality?or maybe especially if it were.

We trust Judge Alameda knows better.

Justice
These days, when the entire judicial system, it seems, is under attack, it?s good to hear that the courts can still come up with verdicts against the rich, powerful and politically connected. And while a Makati court ?only? found former Batangas Gov. Jose Antonio Leviste guilty of the lesser charge of homicide for the killing of his long-time aide and friend Rafael de las Alas two years ago, the decision should encourage those who have less in life and who should rightly get more from our admittedly shaky legal system.

The Supreme Court brouhaha
Insofar as the opposition and critics of the President are concerned, it?s damned-if-she-does and damned-if-she-doesn?t.

Battles worth fighting for
The day I first read about the Pangandaman-De la Paz brawl was the same day I decided I was not going to conclude who was guilty, who was telling the truth and write about it. I was especially adamant that I would not do what many bloggers had already done?make a public call to support Bambee de la Paz simply because she was a fellow blogger. I don?t know what happened. But, if I had let my own prejudices rule over me, I would have taken Bambee?s side too, not because she was a blogger like me but because I don?t like politicians. I especially don?t like second-generation politicians whose only qualification for the job is a well-known surname.

Why Hamas can?t win
Antonion C. Abaya
At least not in the short or medium term. Meaning, in the next three to five years. But beyond that, all bets are off.