DISTRACTION: The Congress in joint public session should not attempt to do more than its constitutionally-mandated task of canvassing the votes in the last May 10 elections and proclaiming the president-elect and the vice president-elect.

If it allows itself to be distracted and sidetracked to other concerns, there could be confusion and undue delay in the proclamation of the two top national Executive officials.

Some characters on the floor with one eye on the TV camera have been wasting time and taxpayers’ money by engaging in the same theatrics that have made legislative public inquiries shameful spectacles.

Before they complicate and derail the proceedings, they should be told that the current joint session is just for consolidating the election scores for the two officials and proclaiming who got the higher score.

That is the task at hand, nothing less, nothing more.

* * *

PROPER VENUES: Care should be taken that the public proceedings are not misused to discredit the just-concluded semi-automated national elections. Despite some problems, the polls have been widely hailed as generally fair.

Some speakers harp on scattered technical glitches and administrative lapses. Talk of offers to rig the count, of election paraphernalia having been vandalized, and such anecdotal accounts should be investigated by the police leading to prosecution.

Candidates claiming to have been cheated should not use the joint session to start laying the basis for their complaints. There are proper venues for hearing and resolving their problems.

Those who ran for congressional seats and lost (“cheated,” according to them) can initiate the proper action in their respective chamber’s electoral tribunal, and not waste the time of the joint session.

If any presidential or vice presidential candidates is considering a protest, he can prepare to face the Supreme Court sitting en banc as the presidential electoral tribunal. He should not prematurely ventilated it in the joint session.

* * *

HOSTILE WITNESS: The president of a giant Makati-based bank is set to appear today at the Makati Regional Trial Court Branch 62 to explain why they allowed the withdrawal of over P100 million from the Philcomsat Holdings Corp. account.

The executive was subpoenaed by RTC Judge Selma Alaras as hostile witness for PHC. The firm had questioned the withdrawals that the bank allowed despite written protests that the persons issuing the checks were acting illegally as PHC officers.

Banks normally freeze funds with the least hint of internal trouble, but the Makati bank refused to deny encashment or file an interpleader case. The PHC board had written 10 letters alerting the bank about attempts to loot PHC.

* * *

FUNDS MISMANAGED: The PHC now wants the bank to return the millions that it said were improperly handled. In one instance, a check for P1 million written “pay to Cash” was allegedly encashed by a messenger.

A ranking PHC officer said it was deplorable that due care was not exercised in the management of corporate funds deposited with the bank.

The PHC is a publicly listed corporation. Its business is the investing public’s business. Its stockholders cannot allow impostors, even if they carry ID cards of the Presidential Commission on Good Government, to loot its coffers.

In the hands of PCGG agents who were supposed to conserve its assets, the PHC assets of more than P1.4 billion were dissipated to some P600 million before the true owners took back the management of the firm.

* * *

OVERBLOWN: If Chief Justice Renato Corona were to be believed — and I see no reason not to believe him – the reported differences he has had with senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio, his rival for the CJ post, were somewhat overblown.

Corona said in an interview over the radio: “We didn’t really fight. It’s not right to say that. We just had a competition, and we lawyers are used to this.”

“We were really that close,” he said. The two magistrates have been friends for more than four decades, and are in fact godfathers of each other’s sons.

When asked about reports that their relationship has been strained by the controversy over his appointment, he said, “Our friendship has not been broken. That’s not true. It’s just our job and there’s nothing personal.”

According to him, Carpio kept away from efforts of some quarters to block his (Corona’s) appointment. “In fairness to Justice Carpio, I didn’t hear or know any word from him that he had said against me,” he said.

* * *

NO PROBLEM: Corona repeated his remarks that he saw no problem with the plan of incoming president Noynoy Aquino to break tradition by not taking his oath before the Chief Justice on June 30.

 “I have no issue about it,” Corona said. “That is not required under the law.”

But he expressed the hope that there would be cooperation between the Supreme  Court and Malacanang under Aquino.

“The intent of the Constitution is to have three separate branches (of government),” he said. “But that does not mean we should go against each other, it only means that we should be independent of each other.”

Corona added that there was no need to offer reconciliation to the would-be president since they are “not enemies.”

 “There is nothing to reconcile because I am not angry at him,” he said. “For me, it’s no longer important to hold dialogues because as far as I am concerned my appointment has already been done.”