PAO CHIEF VS. SUPREME COURT
* AI ("Artificial Intelligence") subtitles on Tagalog.com are generated using "Whisper" by OpenAI (the same company that created ChatGPT and DallE2). Results and accuracy may vary.
* The subtitles do include errors occasionally and should only be used as a tool to help with your listening practice.
* You can request this website to create a transcript for a video if one doesn't already exist by clicking the "Request AI Subtitles" button below a video. Transcribing usually takes 30-40% of the length of a video to complete if there are no other videos in
the queue. For example, a 21 minute video will take 7-8 minutes to transcribe.
* Running a super fast cloud GPU server to do these transcriptions does cost money. If you have the desire and financial ability, consider
becoming a patron
to support these video transcriptions, and the other tools and apps built by Tagalog.com
00:00.0
... Ang gagawin ko lang dito ipapaliwanag ko sa inyo kung ano nangyari para maintindihan nyo. Tapos siyempre this is an ongoing case, we will not be touching on the merits."
00:30.0
... Kung ano nangyari kung bakit humantong sa ganoon. Ito, this was published in the Philippine Daily Inquirer April 22, 2023. Itong sinabi dito, citing new lawyer's code PAO tells SC we can play both sides. Bakit both sides?
01:00.0
... Ang sinabi dito, a conflict of interest of any of the lawyers of the PAO incident to services rendered for the office shall be imputed only to the said lawyer and the lawyer's supervisor."
01:31.0
... Hindi ka na pwedeng kumuha ng PAO lawyer sa kabila. Absolute yun. Ibig sabihin hindi pwedeng yung plaintiff at yung defendant ay maging PAO pareho.
01:48.5
... Yan ang binago dito. Ang sinabi dito wala ng conflict of interest dyan. Pwede nang maglaban ang PAO at PAO sa iisang kaso kasi ang conflict of interest ay nag-e-extend lamang doon sa abogadong may hawak ng kaso at yung mas nakaka-taas sa kanya.
02:13.0
... So hanggang doon lang. Ngayon pwede kang kumuha ng ibang PAO lawyer na may ibang immediate supervisor.
02:23.5
... So yun lang, hindi naaabod sa buong organization ng PAO. Dati kasi mga kapatid natin hindi pwedeng PAO versus PAO.
02:35.0
... PAO organization versus PAO organization hindi pwede. Ngayon pwede na kasi ang conflict of interest lang ay doon sa abogadong may hawak mismo at doon sa mas nakaka-taas sa kanya immediately sa unang boss niya.
02:53.5
Very good observation Rekul. Paunahan dati. Kung sino yung nauna mga kapatid natin, siya lang yung i-represent. Ikaw maghanap ka na sa iba.
03:09.0
Pero hindi na pwede sa PAO. Ngayon pwede na sa PAO as long as yung abogado at yung immediate supervisor ay iba.
03:21.5
So paunahan. Sabing ganyan, yung conflict of interest na yun ay hindi na magdi-disqualify sa ibang PAO para i-represent ang isang kliyente.
03:36.0
Ang kailangan lang gawin ay i-disclose o sabihin sa lahat ng parties doon sa PAO. Tapos may written informed consent.
03:51.5
Ito yung section 22 canon 3 ng CPRA kung saan mga kapatid natin, question. Question ni PAO chief at sinasabi niya nasana i-amend yan.
04:21.5
As she told reporters, adding that their agency, which in most cases extends legal assistance to the intended defendants, cannot provide two lawyers who will argue with each other in court.
04:31.5
So yun ang argument ni PAO chief Presidia Acosta.
04:40.5
Ngayon, well, pupunta na tayo dito sa nangyari.
04:47.0
Wala pa namang masamang nangyari dito sa kaso na ito.
04:57.0
Wala pa namang masamang nangyari kay PAO chief. Everything is due process.
05:03.5
Ang nangyari ngayon, ginawa. Yung Supreme Court dinismiss yung request ng PAO chief na i-delete yung part of Code of Provincial Responsibility na yun na pwede nilang i-invoke yung conflict of interest.
05:23.5
Sabing ganyan, meron daw unabated public tirades.
05:29.0
Ano pa na ba si Petty Radz?
05:38.0
Unabated public tirades against Canon 3 Section 22 through social media and mainstream media branding the adoption of the CPRA as unconstitutional and an undue interference and intrusion by the SC into PAO's operations.
05:56.5
So ano ang nangyari dyan mga kabatas natin?
05:59.5
Ang pagpapaliwanag kasi na sinasabi nila bakit dinala mo muna sa media?
06:05.5
E syempre ang nag-issue kasi nun ay yung Supreme Court.
06:08.5
You are an officer of the court.
06:10.5
If you are an officer of the court, dapat huwag mong batikusin yun o tirahin yun sa social media.
06:19.5
Dapat idaan mo doon sa tamang proseso, sa due process mga kabatas natin.
06:24.0
So, doon pinagpapaliwanag itong si Prisida Acosta.
06:32.0
Hindi actually, hindi siya pinapagalitan o hindi siya, hindi namang pinapagalitan, wala pang galit.
06:41.0
Hindi siya pinag-eexplain.
06:43.0
Sorry, yun ang tamang term.
06:44.0
Hindi siya pinag-eexplain dahil question niya yung Section 22 ng Canon 3.
06:52.5
Pinag-eexplain siya bakit merong kang mga akosasyon sa social media tungkol sa Section 22 Canon 3 na yan.
07:05.5
At hindi mo nalang hinayaan na itakal yan ng Supreme Court o idaan sa tamang proseso.
07:13.5
Yun mga kabatas natin.
07:15.5
Yan lang naman, ganun kasimple yan mga kabatas natin.
07:19.0
Ang dami kasi nagtatanong sa akin bakit mali ba yung mag-question ka sa Supreme Court.
07:24.0
If you will go to the Supreme Court and question it, is it wrong? It's not wrong.
07:28.0
Actually that's the proper thing to do.
07:31.0
The problem is syempre yung pangungunahan mo yung isang bagay na humihingi ka ng decision eventually sa Supreme Court.
07:43.5
Di ba? Tanong ni Rekul dito, need pa din niya sumagot kahit nag-sorry na siya. Yes.
07:53.5
Nag-sorry na daw siya eh. Di ba?
07:55.5
Alam niyo, it's of course, people commit mistakes.
08:00.5
People commit mistakes. Wala namang problema diyan.
08:04.5
Ang importante diyan, we own up to our mistakes. We say sorry.
08:08.5
Tulad ng ginawa dito ni Pao Chief.
08:11.0
Kung kunwari the Supreme Court found it improper, kaya siya pinag-explain, well of course.
08:22.0
A sorry should be in line. A sorry should be issued.
08:27.0
Ginawa niya nga yun and that's a sign of a good leader.
08:34.5
People commit mistakes. If you are mistaken, say sorry, explain to the Supreme Court,
08:39.5
then let's hope the Supreme Court understands you and not cite you in contempt.
08:49.5
Pero yun lang na mga buds natin, naipaliwanag ko na sa inyo.
08:53.0
I think naisinabi ko rin kasi sa inyo noon na hindi pwedeng Pao vs. Pao doon sa korte.
09:02.0
Pero ngayon pwede na.
09:04.0
Kasi wala ng conflict of interest as long as magkaibang lawyer and magkaibang immediate supervisor.
09:13.0
Maraming salamat po mga kapatid natin.
09:16.0
At syempre tulad ng laging sinasabi, matulog po tayo ng may imbing dahil alam natin na yung natutulog ng may imbing, siya yung laging panalo.
