nath

[nath @nathnathy_]

my term will end by end of this month. it was a phenomenal experience. Thank you komsay!

[nath @nathnathy_]

A month into my administration as presy of CS³, padayun lang.

[Inquirer @inquirerdotnet]

BREAKING: The Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court has named Senators Bato Dela Rosa, Bong Go and other personalities as “co-perpetrators” of the drug war campaign.

Their names are included in the public lesser redacted version of Document Containing Charges dated February 13, 2026. | @DSampangINQ

READ MORE: https://t.co/FAnAuaGslp

[Jover Laurio @PinoyAkoBlog]

So tama pala si Secretary Remulla

The claim that restitution can never be required of an applicant to the Witness Protection Program is inconsistent with both statute and jurisprudence.

As early as Guingona v. CA (GR 125532, 1998), the Supreme Court held that prosecutors are "afforded much leeway in choosing whom to admit into the Program," further adding that:

“The prosecution of crimes appertains to the executive department of government whose principal power and responsibility is to see that our laws are faithfully executed. A necessary component of this power to execute our laws is the right to prosecute their violators. The right to prosecute vests the prosecutor with a wide range of discretion — the discretion of whether, what and whom to charge, the exercise of which depends on a smorgasbord of factors which are best appreciated by prosecutors.”

In 2006 (Reyes v. Guingona), the Supreme Court in fact emphasized, "The admission of a potential witness under RA 6981 is a matter addressed to the sound discretion of the Secretary of Justice.”

These rulings establish two principles:

1. The discretion to prosecute rests squarely with the Executive.

2. The discretion to admit an applicant into the WPP lies with the Department of Justice, subject to statutory limits but otherwise broad.

On this basis, it is legally untenable to categorically exclude restitution as a condition. To the contrary, requiring restitution, PARTICULARLY before conviction, may serve important ends: it acknowledges wrongdoing, restores losses, expedites proceedings, and reinforces accountability, while still affording protection where necessary. In other words, akin to a plea of guilt, the offender admits wrongdoing without having to go through the rigors of trial, saving time and resources in the process.

In any event, the bottomline is this: when public coffers have been emptied by corruption, restitution is not just a legal option, but a moral imperative. Accountability demands both truth and reparation. To deny this discretion outright is to turn a blind eye not only to jurisprudence, but the very principle that those who betray the public trust must also make the public whole.

Respectfully submitted.

- Atty. R

[Penta @Pentaeth_]

To all my Web3 friends out there.

If you're asking what's happening in my country "Indonesia" right now, there have been public demonstrations starting from the 25th until today.

Which have led to large crowds setting fire to several regional parliament (DPRD) buildings across different areas in Indonesia

Here are the details 👇

[nath @nathnathy_]

A month into my administration as presy of CS³, padayun lang.

[nath @nathnathy_]

I don't need sleep, I need a name for our soon to be publication team 😔🥀

[🇵🇭 Laitera🇵🇭 @laiteranidaddy]

Nepo baby 🤭

Disney princess yarn 😏

[Ivan 🇵🇭🇻🇦 @IvanAtHome]

Great story by the Inquirer.

During the entire Duterte administration, over P330 BILLION PESOS was spent on "flood control" projects between the periods of 2017 to 2019. Oddly enough, this is close to the amount of the money he cut from the Armed Forces Modernization Fund, as reported by @MonteroMax .

The Filipino people must ask where that money went and who benefited from it. The funding was broken down as so.

- 2017: P79 billion
- 2018: P134 billion
- 2019: P119 billion

A good place to start asking is places where the money went. A lot went to flood-free towns/municipalities that were never highlighted by local or international studies (Project NOAH, World Bank, JICA) as flood-probe. The House of Representatives has done great work unearthing all this and bringing it to light.

Example: Casiguran, Sorsogon got P385 million for "flood-control" projects in 2019 despite not being highlighted as flood prone. Nearby Matnog, Sorsogon - which IS a flood-prone area, got nothing.

Mayor Jose Edwin Hamor of Casiguran, Sorsogon, is the husband of Sorsogon Vice Gov. Ester Hamor, the mother of Romeo Sicat Jr., who is the husband of DUTERTE'S BUDGET SECRETARY Benjamin Diokno's daughter, Charlotte Justin.

Aremar Construction Corp., which was involved in several public works projects worth P10 billion in Sorsogon in partnership with other companies, also was owned by the Hamor family.

Projects awarded in Casiguran, a flood-free town with ties to Duterte's budget secretary:
- Somal-ot Seawall: P100M
- Lungib Embankment: P80M
- Himaoyan Flood Control: P75M
- Cagpagol River Control: P45M
- Suji River Control: P25M
- Poblacion Drainage: P60M

This is just one municipality. Multiply this many times over and you will understand the rot which plagues our public works and finance departments - worsened under Duterte and pervasive under now.

https://t.co/xdAeHKM3AO

[GlennLopez @glnnlopez]

Robin Padilla as chair of the Senate Committee on Constitutional Amendments? He’s not even a lawyer. No background in constitutional law or legislative work. Just a Duterte loyalist with star power. This 20th Congress might just be worse than the last. #PHSenate

[nath @nathnathy_]

wtf

[Jesus Falcis 🇵🇭 @jesusfalcis]

Dark times ahead…

[Jesus Falcis 🇵🇭 @jesusfalcis]

Dark times ahead…

[David Walpiri @DWalpiri]

This is a 1995 footage of Chinese warship & militia blocking a Filipino ship, YEARS before US plan to construct facilities in Philippines. China’s aggression isn’t new. It’s been provoking regional chaos for decades. Stop the lies. The real threat to peace is China.

[nath @nathnathy_]

hmmmm

[LornaHind72 @Lbhdxb72]

Some say the 1% tariff cut for our country isn’t a big deal. But here’s what they’re not seeing: other countries had to spend billions just to get the same or slightly better rate.

Indonesia – 19% tariff rate
• Bought 50 Boeing jets
• Committed to $15B in U.S. energy
• Plus $4.5B in U.S. agri imports
• Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. products

Vietnam – 20% tariff rate
• Agreed to import U.S. LNG, aircraft, and agricultural goods
• Supported a $1.5B Trump-linked resort project
• Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. exports

Japan – 15% tariff rate
• Committed $550B in U.S. investments and loan guarantees
• Bought 100 Boeing jets
• Opened market to U.S. autos, agri, and defense goods
• Also offered 0% or reduced tariffs on U.S. exports under new bilateral terms

All three countries gave major trade concessions and allowed U.S. products in at 0% just to get these tariff rates.

Philippines – 19% tariff rate
✅ No billion-dollar deals
✅ No major trade concessions
✅ Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. goods
✅ And most of our top exports (semiconductors, electronics) are already exempt from U.S. tariffs

So yes, a 1% drop may look small, but the fact that we got it without paying a single cent makes it a quiet win and proof that smart foreign policy still works.

[LornaHind72 @Lbhdxb72]

Some say the 1% tariff cut for our country isn’t a big deal. But here’s what they’re not seeing: other countries had to spend billions just to get the same or slightly better rate.

Indonesia – 19% tariff rate
• Bought 50 Boeing jets
• Committed to $15B in U.S. energy
• Plus $4.5B in U.S. agri imports
• Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. products

Vietnam – 20% tariff rate
• Agreed to import U.S. LNG, aircraft, and agricultural goods
• Supported a $1.5B Trump-linked resort project
• Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. exports

Japan – 15% tariff rate
• Committed $550B in U.S. investments and loan guarantees
• Bought 100 Boeing jets
• Opened market to U.S. autos, agri, and defense goods
• Also offered 0% or reduced tariffs on U.S. exports under new bilateral terms

All three countries gave major trade concessions and allowed U.S. products in at 0% just to get these tariff rates.

Philippines – 19% tariff rate
✅ No billion-dollar deals
✅ No major trade concessions
✅ Also gave 0% tariff access to U.S. goods
✅ And most of our top exports (semiconductors, electronics) are already exempt from U.S. tariffs

So yes, a 1% drop may look small, but the fact that we got it without paying a single cent makes it a quiet win and proof that smart foreign policy still works.

[Richard Heydarian @RichHeydarian]

THE “FANTASTIC FIVE”!!! REMEMBER THEM!!! ✊🇵🇭

[Ivan 🇵🇭🇻🇦 @IvanAtHome]

What the fuck does "remanding" to the House even mean? They'll just send those articles back to the Senate!

[Richard Heydarian @RichHeydarian]

WORST SENATE EVER!!! Periodt!!!

[Pilosopo Tasyo @djakasss]

Ang Senado ay institusyon ng mga:

ex-convict
magnanakaw
mamamatay tao
walang pinag-aralan
oportunistang negosyante,at
traydor sa bayan!

[🇺‌ 🇳‌ 🇴‌ 🤓 @_MIGZ29]

🖕🖕🖕

[Kiko Pangilinan @kikopangilinan]

Sa Usapin ng kapangyarihan ng Senado bilang Impeachment Court ayon sa Konstitusyon:

With all due respect sa mga Senador, sa oras na matanggap ng Senado ang complaint, ang utos ng Saligang Batas ay ‘proceed with trial’ at hindi ‘proceed with dismissal’.

Acquittal o conviction lang ang maaring pagpipilian na pasya ng mga senador bilang mga hukom. Kung walang sapat na ebidensya sa Trial, dapat acquittal. Conviction naman kung sapat ang ebidensya.