5
Editorial
Before the bar
of public opinion
Is
the Binay affair just "politicking" by rival politicians? Or is it a legitimate political concern
which we Filipinos have to scrutinize?
The accusation: Ill-gotten, referring to VP Binay’s alleged wealth. The defense: All we have are legit
said the Binay camp. The counterattack: A conspiracy against Nognog. The parry by Trillanes: An
absurd conspiracy theory.
So far the defenders had the harder time. Being “before the bar of public opinion” is much unlike
being “before the bar of justice.” Whereas, in the latter, the accused is presumed innocent until
proven guilty, in the former case one is usually presumed guilty at the onset, moreover if he is a
public servant.
Before the bar of public opinion, burden of proof, which in court lies with the prosecution, usually
shifts to the defendant. Therefore, in the alleged ill-gotten wealth issue the onus falls upon the Binay camp. On the other hand, dismissing as absurd the allegation of conspiracy against Nognog is
itself absurd. Such “conspiracy” is not illogical. Demolition jobs are not strange in politics.
But wait, if there is a conspiracy against the VP it does not necessarily mean that the issues raised
are not bonafide. A very high ranking official of the land amassing ill-gotten wealth is a serious political concern, despite that the motive of the conspirators is clearly quite self-serving.
A sin is a sin, no matter how and why it is bared. So why not VP Binay confront his accusers and
prove his innocence before the public? This is not yet a court hearing.
By the way, who owns those roosters at the game fowl farm within the Binay hacienda? Is the VP a
sabungero? Mayor Junjun Binay?
Mercado also said that contrary to Binay’s claims, h