MENDICANCY

MENDICANCY- the art of begging, taking advantage of one's pitiful appearance to get something without working for it, pretending to be poverty stricken when they are really not, using rudeness as a tool to claim what they think is their privilege...

I did not look this up in the dictionary...this is my own version of what mendicancy is.

According to an online dictionary, mendicancy means the practice of begging, as for alms or the state or condition of being a beggar.

Just this morning I was angry...riding the bus on the way to work, there was this able bodied person insisting that I accept the piece of paper he was giving out to all the passengers. Already in the bad mood, I pretended that I did not see him.

Not liking my bitchy attitude, he kept on insisting. I had to glare at him so he can get my message of defiance.

After being rejected by the other passengers, he came back to me! He even got the nerve to touch me and still insisted that I buy his overly priced goods!!!

If I was not pregnant, I might have lost my cool and punched him in his face. But I have to teach my child some manners, even if he or she is still in my womb.(sigh!)

After alighting from the bus, another healthy (as in malaki ang katawan) person pestered me with getting me a taxi. I just brushed him off and went to get my own.

As I flagged down a taxi and got in, the jerk came running towards us asking the driver for some money! This time I really lost my cool!

"Ang kapal din naman nang mukha mo ano? Bakit ikaw ba tumawag sa taxing ito? Mahiya ka naman ang laki nang katawan mo hihingi hingi ka lang! Letse!"

Sorry anak, war freak mood talaga nanay mo today...

The point is, why do these people take advantage of virtues such as pity, sympathy, poverty just to get what they want without working for it?

They appeal to our "guilt" because they are poor. They think it is our obligation to give because we have more.

TRUE. We should give to people who needs it, but not to assholes who can still work!!!

I believe in giving to those who are really needy, like the handicapped, to the old and sick, victims of abuse, and children who cannot fend for themselves.

Not to middle-aged men who are stronger than me.

Not to hypocrites who hide behind religion and board buses, preach the word of God then shamelessly ask for donation.

Not to supposedly "out-of-school" youth who board buses and try to defraud you into buying their goods three times as expensive if you buy them in regular stores.

THIS IS REALLY DISTASTEFUL DECEPTION.

I mean, I am six months pregnant yet I work...how come they could not do the same???
These people are not poor, they are lazy. And for that, they do not deserve an ounce of my sympathy.

I have honestly worked for my keep since I was seventeen, and damn I am not gonna let these people take advantage of me.

It's simple, really. If you want to live, work. If you don't work, then you don't eat.
Each and everyone of us has a choice.

If some of us choose mendicancy as a way of life, that is their choice. But they cannot expect us to give because they think it's their freakin right. We work for ours, they should earn theirs by working.

DOJ issues hold departure order against Martinez

The Department of Justice directed the Bureau of Immigration to issue a hold departure order against Securities and Exchange Commission head Jesus Enrique G. Martinez.

Justice secretary Raul M Gonzalez added that the testimony vs. Martinez was "devastating".

"He was not able to refute the allegations." Gonzalez said.

"Whether he is a flight risk or not, we want to make sure that he faces charges here." Gonzalez said.

Gonzalez added that he found the witnesses credible.

"They came to me last Sunday asking for my help. I told them to turn over their documents to me."

Gonzalez also said that he is looking also at the culpability of some BSP personnel.

The investigation, Gonzalez said was a specific order coming from the president.

"She was very angry" Gonzalez confirmed.

A panel was formed to look into the supposed ill-gotten wealth of Martinez.

Sr. State Prosecutor Aileen Marie S. Guttierez, State prosecutor Romeo DC Galvez and State Prosecutor Ramonchito R. Mendoza will be forming the panel.

NBI Director Nestor Mantaring was also directed by Gonzalez to investigate the connection of Martinez in the Legacy group fiasco.

Meanwhile, Rep. Ed Zialcita will also be investigated by the justice department.

"We would like to see if he is part of the conspiracy by way of his consultancy to defraud the people."

Martinez and Zialcita are reportedly cousins.

MMDA ordered by CA to pay vendor P40,000 in damages

FOR ILLEGALLY CONFISCATING a Quezon city vendor's goods and dismantling her store more than five years ago, the Court of Appeals (CA) Twelfth Division has ordered the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) to pay P40,000 in damages.

Penned by Associate Justice Mariano Del Castillo, the ruling said MMDA’s act has deprived Gloria Fenol of her property without due process.

“Although the Court finds it laudable for the MMDA’s intention to remedy the proliferation of sidewalk vendors that hamper the free flow of traffic, we do not, however, permit the persecution of the legitimate vendors that are not nuisance per se. Once their constitutional right is transgressed upon, the judiciary vows to protect them,” the CA said.

Court records showed that on Feb. 3, 2005, the MMDA Sidewalk Clearing Operation Group (SCOG), led by Bobby Esquivel, dismantled Fenol's store and confiscated all her wares for reportedly blocking the free passage of pedestrians in Cubao, Quezon City.

Fenol showed the MMDA team a lease contract with the land owner allowing her to occupy its front space and clearances and permits issued by the QC government to prove that she was occupying a private property and operating legally.

Aside from this, she also showed the MMDA copies of her 2003 business permit and locational clearance, with the MMDA’s stamp of approval, as further proof that the agency was already aware of her store’s existence.

But the MMDA ignored these documents and proceeded with the clearing operation, prompting her to seek redress before the court.

Both the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) and the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City initially ruled in MMDA’s favor. But the CA reversed their decision.

Fenol claimed for damages in the amount of P100,000 but failed to substantiate her claim with documentary proof

Life of a Seafarer's Wife...

When I was still single and available, I never thought that I would be married to a seaman.

My father, who was a U.S. Navy serviceman of 30years was always away. He got to be around when I was already in my rebellious years. It was tough because at first it felt that he was a stranger considering that only my mother was there in our growing years.

Later, I realized that my father yearned for our love and attention. All those times when I misunderstood him I realized that he needed us more.

Now, I am sharing the fate of my mother. My husband, who is always away misses a lot in life.
He has missed a lot of birthdays, valentines day, anniversaries, christmas and other special occassions.

He missed my graduation in law school. Now, he will miss the birth of his first born.

Being pregnant and alone is very tough. I know that I am strong, but sometimes I wish that he was beside me to ease my fears, my weird cravings, my worst thoughts...

How I wish he was with me during my prenatal check-ups, when I buy things for our baby, when I saw our baby's heart beat for the first time, to talk about our dreams for our child...

Many times I feel sad because he is not here to share this wonderful experience with me.
Then again, I know that he is enduring so much to give us a comfortable life.

When he calls, I can sense that he is sad and misses us so much...I am just praying to God that somehow I can be strong enough to ease his sadness away.

To God I made a covenant...that I will love and protect my family no matter what. Though at times I am not perfect, I will try my best to give them 100% of myself.

My family is my life now, and there is nothing I will not do for them.

I trust God's wisdom, and His grand design in my life. I believe that He will help me become a good wife and a good mother.

Whatever were my mistakes in the past, I know that I have been forgiven...and to learn not to commit those mistakes again.

The baby that I now carry in my womb is God's blessing to us that I must take care and cherish. For this gift He has entrusted to me, I am exceedingly happy.

To my husband who loves me despite everything that has transpired in our life, I vow to love, take care and protect til the remaining days of my life. And though he may not always be here for us, i will make sure that he will not become a stranger to our child/children.

We will always be here for him, to love him and to see to it that all his sacrifices and hard work will be put in good use...

The life of a seaman's wife might be lonely, but I know that I am not alone...

CA TURNS DOWN AMLAC APPEAL ON BOLANTE ACCOUNTS
----------------

A RULING by the Court of Appeals (CA) has turned down an urgent motion of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to reinstate the freeze the bank accounts of controversial former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Jocjoc” Bolante and several other individuals linked in the P728-million fertilizer fund scam.

The AMLC along with the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed on February 2, 2009 an urgent ex-parte petition for the issuance of a freeze order, docketed as C.A. G.R. AMLC No. 00024, against the banks accounts after the freeze order issued by the CA Former First Division lapsed on December 20, 2008.

The freeze order previously covered accounts and insurance policies at Banco de Oro Universal Bank, Citbank, N.A., East-West Bank, Maybank Phils. Inc, Metropolitan Bank and Trust Co., Philippine National Bank, Insular Life Assce. Company, Pru Life Insurance Corp. of UK, Manufacturers Life Ins. Co., BPI/MS Insurance Corp., Performance Foreign Exchange Corp., Prudential Bank, Bank of the Philippine Islands, Union Bank of the Philippines, Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation and Standard Chartered Bank.

Aside from Bolante, the AMLC identified the other holders of these various accounts as Molugan Foundation, Alliance for the Conservation of the Environment of Pangasinan, Inc., Sta. Lucia Education Association of Bulacan, Inc., Livelihood Corporation (Livecor), Ariel C. Panganiban, spouses Samuel and Katherine Bombeo.

The appellate tribunal conducted a summary hearing on AMLC’s ex-parte motion on February 12, 2009 to determine whether or not the freeze order should be lifted or extended beyond the 20-day period.

The CA noted that the parties in the new ex-parte motion and in C.A. G.R. AMLC 00014 filed on June 30, 2008 are the same and the rights asserted and the relief prayed for are substantially based on the same facts.

“Petitioner had already been granted the relief prayed for when the Former First Division issued a six-month freeze order in C.A. G.R. AMLC No. 00014 which it now seeks to obtain again in the instant petition. Otherwise, stated, the rule against forum shopping finds proper application here since the two cases are based on the same essential facts and circumstances thereby raising identical causes of action and issues,” the appellate court said..

“Consequently, the acts of petitioner constitutes a clear case of forum shopping, an act of malpractice that is proscribed and condemned as trifling with the court and abusing its processes. It is improper conduct that tends to degrade the administration of justice,” it added.

It can be recalled that in C.A. G.R. AMLC 00014, the CA, in a resolution released on July 1, 2008, issued a 20-day freeze order covering 70 accounts under the name of Bolante and several other individuals and entities believed to have been used to funnel the P728-million fertilizer fund.

The freeze order was later extended up to August 19, 2008 in order to allow AMLC to conduct and conclude an exhaustive and comprehensive financial investigation of the said accounts. On July 23, 2008, AMLC filed an ex-parte application with the Regional Trial Court of Makati City for an order authorizing it to conduct an inquiry into the accounts and investments covered by the freeze order. The lower court granted the application in a resolution issued on July 25, 2008. On August 20, 2008 the CA’s First Division issued a resolution extending for four months or until December 20, 2008 the freeze order.

In the same resolution penned Associate Justice Pampio A. Abarintos, the CA’s former First Division removed from the coverage of the freeze order more than 30 accounts in various banks and institutions after it was learned that these accounts have already been “cancelled, written off, closed or expired.”

On December 20, the freeze order lapsed without the filing of any forfeiture case against Bolante.

The OSG and AMLC counsels, in their new ex-parte motion, claimed that their failure to conclude the inquiry into Bolante’s bank accounts and related web accounts was due to the Supreme Court ruling on February 14, 2008 which declared an application for bank inquiry cannot be obtained ex parte.

Such supervening event, according to the government counsels, is a sufficient ground in seeking the issuance of a new freeze order.

But the appellate court noted that the said SC ruling in the “Eugenio case” was promulgated on February 14, 2008 or almost five months prior to the filing of AMLC’s ex-parte motion for the issuance of freeze order in C.A. G.R. AMLC No. 00014.

Instead of filing with the RTC of an application for bank inquiry with notices to concerned parties, the appellate court said AMLC opted to file its application ex-parte on July 23, 2008.

“Clearly, petitioner’s failure to conclude the inquiry into the bank accounts of respondents during the effectivity of the freeze order in C.A. G.R. AMLC No. 00014 was of its doing. Upon the promulgation of the decision in the Eugenio case as early as February 14, 2008, petitioner should have taken steps to expedite the bank inquiry that it was conducting,” the CA stressed.

The request of the petitioner for the issuance of another freeze order, according to the CA, is in effect an extension of the six-month freeze order already issued by the former First Division, which is prohibited under Section 53 of SC-Administrative Circular No. 05-11-04.

The said circular allows the extension of a freeze order for a period not exceeding six months. Concurring with the ruling were CA Presiding Justice Conrado Vasquez Jr., and Associate Justice Noel Tijam.