http://jlp-law.com/blog/ombudsman-philippines-protector-people/ Philippine laws and legal system (JLP-Law blog) Thu, 09 Feb 2012 19:27:09 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 http://jlp-law.com/blog/ombudsman-philippines-protector-people/comment-page-1/#comment-19753 Definitely Filipino » Blog Archive » Of Hostage Dramas and “Telenovelas” Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:00:45 +0000 http://jlp-law.com/blog/ombudsman-philippines-protector-people/#comment-19753 [...] should have been responsible in reviewing his case before he had gone berserk. I just wish that the Office of the Ombudsman learns some important lessons from all the terrible things that happened, that all pending cases [...] [...] should have been responsible in reviewing his case before he had gone berserk. I just wish that the Office of the Ombudsman learns some important lessons from all the terrible things that happened, that all pending cases [...]

]]> http://jlp-law.com/blog/ombudsman-philippines-protector-people/comment-page-1/#comment-10848 Effect of pending cases on the Senate’s power to conduct investigation in aid of legislation at Philippine e-Legal Forum Tue, 19 Feb 2008 06:26:56 +0000 http://jlp-law.com/blog/ombudsman-philippines-protector-people/#comment-10848 [...] There’s a radio commentary discussing the possible effect of the pending complaints filed with the Office of the Ombudsman on the Senate hearings in connection with the aborted $329-million national broadband network (NBN) deal with China’s ZTE Corp., with Rodolfo Noel “Jun” Lozada, Jr. as the central witness. The commentary cited the case of Bengzon, Jr. vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, in which case the Supreme Court (SC) stopped an investigation of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee as “the issue to be investigated was one over which jurisdiction had already been acquired by the Sandiganbayan, and to allow the [Senate Blue Ribbon] Committee to investigate the matter would create the possibility of conflicting judgments; and that the inquiry into the same justiciable controversy would be an encroachment on the exclusive domain of judicial jurisdiction that had set in much earlier.” [...] [...] There’s a radio commentary discussing the possible effect of the pending complaints filed with the Office of the Ombudsman on the Senate hearings in connection with the aborted $329-million national broadband network (NBN) deal with China’s ZTE Corp., with Rodolfo Noel “Jun” Lozada, Jr. as the central witness. The commentary cited the case of Bengzon, Jr. vs. Senate Blue Ribbon Committee, in which case the Supreme Court (SC) stopped an investigation of the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee as “the issue to be investigated was one over which jurisdiction had already been acquired by the Sandiganbayan, and to allow the [Senate Blue Ribbon] Committee to investigate the matter would create the possibility of conflicting judgments; and that the inquiry into the same justiciable controversy would be an encroachment on the exclusive domain of judicial jurisdiction that had set in much earlier.” [...]

]]>