Many have expressed concern over an apparent media rampage by Senator Panfilo Lacson Jr. against the decision by former National Police officer Cesar Mancao to spill the beans regarding the Dacer-Corbito double murder case.

The reactions by the good senator, according to media reports, have ranged from an expression of confidence that Mancao will not implicate him to accusations that Malacañang has pressured Mancao to execute the affidavit linking him to the Dacer-Corbito slay case.

The common perception is that Lacson is trying to influence the direction of public opinion regarding the official release of Mancao’s affidavit. The senator has even linked the reappearance of Mancao as part of the effort to torpedo his bid for the presidency in 2010.

Some people are saying that Lacson’s reaction could be a sign that he is really worried about what Mancao has to say about the death of publicist Bubby Dacer and his driver Emmanuel Corbito eight years ago.

But even if Mancao or another witness who is coming out, Glenn Dumlao, implicate him, Lacson should remember that what they will say against him or anybody else are just allegations.

At the end of the day, the anticipated testimonies of Mancao and Dumlao will go through the judicial process, not the political process with which the public has become familiar with, thanks to the endless Senate investigations.

Unlike Senate probes, the judicial process to which the Mancao and Dumlao testimonies would be subjected to is an entirely different and fairer process from the politically laced Senate investigations.

People are very aware that Senate investigations usually impute guilt to a party right at the very start. “Witnesses” are the summoned to beef up what the investigating legislators have wanted to show right from the very beginning.

As Senator Miriam Defensor-Santiago herself once noted, Senate investigations have seldom tested the credibility and character of “witnesses”—unless they present a testimony contrary to what a probing senator expects—in which case they are grilled and later dubbed incredible.

Senators say that Senate investigations are not meant to prove a certain party’s guilt. True. And that is because the guilt is usually already presumed at the very start. The whole investigation merely becomes a process of dramatizing the presumption.

That hopefully will not be the case as far as Mancao and Dumlao are concerned.

Judicial processes follow the time-honored principle that a person “is presumed innocent until proven guilty.”

It is a tedious process, but its protracted nature provides protection to the accused.

Whatever it is that Mancao and Dumlao will have to say will have to be taken merely as allegations, not facts. Their testimonies will initially provide a takeoff point to what the Justice Department calls a re-investigation of the double murder.

Only after the investigation can charges be filed before the appropriate court. And even after charges are filed, the presumption of innocence remains.

Mancao’s and Dumlao’s testimonies will have to pass the litmus test of validity and credibility. They will have to be corroborated. The judicial process will have to make sure that the testimonies are not mere innuendoes and hearsay which are acceptable in Senate hearings.

Those whom the testimonies might implicate will have their “day in court.” Their lawyers will have the opportunity to demolish the credibility and validity of both the witnesses and their testimonies—a feature of the judicial process apparently not present in Senate investigations.

And since double murder is a crime that calls for the highest penalty of reclusion perpetua or life sentence, it will have to be “proven beyond reasonable doubt.” A “preponderance of evidence” will not suffice. The slightest hint of “reasonable doubt” could demolish the case.

So Lacson has little to worry about assuming that the scoop reports are true that he is implicated by the Mancao testimony. The judicial process has built-in protection. It will not be a political process.

We hope everyone would give the Mancao testimony a chance to be made public and presented to the appropriate court. We all want to know what Mancao has to say.

After all, Dacer and Corbito both deserve justice. The Mancao testimony, whatever it is, just might hold the key. At the end of the day, we all want to know why the two were killed and who killed them.

Let us allow the judicial process to lay the verdict on this testimony. A premature assault on its credibility simply creates the impression that one is afraid of the truth.