LASALLELIGHT:

LASALLIANS ON TRUTH
AND JUSTICE
(Portfolio of Commentaries and
Interviews)

Submitted by:
Abdul Mojeeb Rashid R. Camama
St. John XXIII

Submitted to:
Sir Vergel Andam Ruelan
 ACTIVITY 1
Leachon added that an overwhelming majority of House
Members welcomed the shift pegging 12 years old as the
new minimum, including all the co-authors of the measure.

Leachon stressed that the measure focuses on safeguarding

children through reform and rehabilitation.

He further shared that most of the changes approved at the

committee level which include changing the term “minimum age
of criminal responsibility” to “minimum age of social
responsibility” were carried over into the most recent version of
the bill.

Insertions on second reading include provisions to ensure funding

for the development of Bahay Pag-asa, a 24-hour child-caring
institution that provides short-term residential care for children in
conflict with the law.

Under the House panel’s proposed bill, the Department of Social

Welfare and Development will build, fund and run Bahay Pag-asa
facilities. Congress will allocate funds for Bahay Pag-asa annually.

It would be noted that in a Senate hearing, Tricia Oco, executive

director of the government's Juvenile Justice and Welfare Council,
lamented on the subhuman conditions of some “Bahay Pag-asa”
due to budget constraints.

“They lack the minimum staff requirement; they even lack food for
children. Some of the Bahay Pag-asa that we saw are worse than
prisons. They don’t have programs, beds and cabinets,” Oco told
 the Senate committee on justice led by Sen. Richard Gordon
Tuesday.

Oco added that there are only 63 Bahay Pag-asa facilities

nationwide, five of which are no longer operational.

Under the provisions of the measure, a child under 18 years old

who commits a petty crime shall not be subjected to mandatory
confinement in a Bahay Pag-asa facility.

COMMENTARIES
You don’t help victimized and marginalized children by
branding them as criminals and limiting their options while
growing up. This vile and callous retreat is, in fact, a clear
indictment of the government’s failure until now to protect
and advance the rights of our children, particularly those
coming from the poor majority of our society. No less, this is
still anti-poor and anti-child
 ACTIVITY 2
Examples of paradigms/dilemma of truth
and justice:

TRUTH
We may be asked by someone we know and care for to
tell them the truth about something that concerns them.
But we may also be bound by loyalty and a promise not to
reveal what we know. Which one do we compromise?

JUSTICE
What about a situation in which someone has clearly done
wrong, gone against the rules, and broken trust? You have
the power to punish that person. Do you have any
options? Others will look at your decision to fire that
person and think you are power-hungry and heartless. But
if you let that person off some might think that the rules
don't matter and you're too soft. Justice is important to a
community because it means that all will be treated
equally and fairly. But maybe there are situations where
the best thing is to find a third way between punishment
and ignoring the offense.
 OBSTACLES ON RESPECTING TRUTH
“If you live according to my teaching, you are truly my
disciples; then you will know the truth, and the truth will
set you free.” (Jn 8:31-32)
 “Acquire a fresh, spiritual way of thinking. You must
put on that new man created in God’s image, whose
justice and holiness are born of truth. See to it, then,
that you put an end to lying. Let everyone speak the truth
to his neighbor, for we are members of one another.”
(Eph 4:23-25)
1217. Respecting Truth, then, involves much more than
“telling the truth,” or merely avoiding “verbal offenses” or
“lying.” Modern man is caught up in the continuous process of
searching for truth __ through modern physical and social
sciences, through history, philosophy and the arts. We all
participate in this search for truth in our own unique ways: in
reflecting on our lives, in constant dialogue with others, in our
community activities __ and especially in our converse with God
in prayer. If we stop this search for truth, we become intolerant
and intolerably self-centered and self-satisfied. Without truth we
can neither develop authentically as human persons, nor relate
positively to others in community.
DIRECT VIOLATIONS OF TRUTH
THE EIGHTH COMMANDMENT

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. 253

It was said to the men of old, "You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn." 254

2464 The eighth commandment forbids misrepresenting the truth in our relations with others. This moral
prescription flows from the vocation of the holy people to bear witness to their God who is the truth and
wills the truth. Offenses against the truth express by word or deed a refusal to commit oneself to moral
uprightness: they are fundamental infidelities to God and, in this sense, they undermine the foundations of
the covenant.

ACTIVITY 3
 PERJURY
Perjury charges may be brought against individuals who swear or
affirm that they will tell the truth and then lie instead. If, however,
witnesses were unaware that the stated facts had changed or were
different, they merely supplied mistaken observations rather than
perjured testimony. Under perjury law, not only must the speaker
make a false statement, but the statement must be of such
magnitude that it influences an official proceeding’s outcome. A
false statement given under oath relating to a minor or an
immaterial matter is not perjury, even though the statement could
be deemed a lie, because perjury law is centered on protecting the
credibility of official proceedings, and punishing everyone who
makes a misstatement would be time-consuming and would not
serve the purpose of upholding the integrity of legal processes.

In the Supreme Court case of Bronston v. United States (1973), the

complexity of meeting the “false statement” requirement is
illustrated. At issue was whether perjury occurs when witnesses
under oath state literal truths but are unresponsive or misleading
in response to questions. In this case, businessman Samuel
Bronston was asked whether he had bank accounts in Swiss
banks; he replied “no,” and when asked if he ever had any bank
accounts there, he stated that the company had an account for six
months in Zurich. The literal truth was that Bronston had had a
personal Swiss bank account for five years. Bronston addressed
his company’s assets, not his own. Technically his answer to the
first question was true because he previously had held a Swiss
bank account but at the time of questioning he did not. Later he
was tried and convicted for perjury. However, in a decision written
by Chief Justice Warren Earl Burger, the Supreme Court reversed
his conviction, holding that although Bronston may have knowingly
misled, his statements were literally true. If a line of questioning is
ambiguous, the answers given will not support a perjury
conviction. Although Bronston made misleading and evasive
statements, this alone is not sufficient to meet the false statement
requirement.

A 1998 perjury charge related to the impeachment of President Bill

Clinton further demonstrates how difficult it is to justify a perjury
prosecution. Experts argue over whether President Clinton
perjured himself when testifying before the grand jury about his
relationship with former White

House intern Monica Lewinsky. The law draws a line between lying
and perjury. Ultimately whether the president had “sexual
relations” with Lewinsky became the center of Paula Jones’s sexual
harassment lawsuit against Clinton. Clinton’s denial that he had
had “sexual relations” with Lewinsky gave rise to accusations that
he lied under oath and obstructed justice. He was ultimately
impeached in the U.S. House of Representatives for perjury and
obstruction of justice in the Jones case but was not convicted in
the U.S. Senate. Many claim that he was prosecuted for perjury for
political reasons and that most citizens would rarely be charged
with perjury over matters such as this. The evidence shows,
however, that ordinary citizens are prosecuted for “small lies,” and
a number have been convicted of perjury for lying about sexual
affairs. Still, many high-profile cases demonstrate that prosecuting
perjury is not easy because of the legal standards imposed in the
Bronston case.
 ACTIVITY 4&5
WAR ON DRUGS

 A Filipino Priest said that President Duterte is the only

president he knows with a heart for the ordinary people. He has
exposed the drug syndicate as ‘the mother of all crimes’ from
murders, rapes, hold-ups, etc. to the system of corruption
involving some policemen, politicians, business people and
entertainers, and even some of the most respected personalities.

Pres. Duterte repeats “I Love the Filipino People, I must protect

them, especially the young…” The passionate call of the
president has aroused alarm about the proliferation of drugs and
other related vices, from drinking to pornography, prostitution
and criminalities. All of these have become big business and
enjoy protection and impunity with the tacit consent of public
opinion because of the culture of permissiveness and the culture
of death. Can we allow the gradual killing of many, mostly
young people, who are destroying their health, and become
unproductive and destructive in their families and in society,
until they are actually killing themselves?

Pres. Duterte has launched an all-out war on drugs. The Police

now claim that those who do not surrender can be killed, and the
vigilantes are thirsty for blood. Any war dehumanizes killers,
especially when civilians become targets. Duterte has declared
that he respects the laws of war for the protection of civilians or
even unarmed enemies.

BULLYING
 Attitudes to bullying have changed in recent decades. Not so
long ago, it was rather common to hear that bullying was a
natural part of growing up, something you should just learn to
cope with. Although less common now, these views have not
gone away. In 2010, Helene Guldberg reanimated the issue;
under the heading ‘Sorry, but it can be GOOD for children to be
bullied’, she said that ‘Today’s obsession with the long-term
effects of bullying means children are growing up without the
social skills or toughness to exist and compete in the adult
world. To me, that seems far more damaging to their
development and their relationships with each other than any
fight or insult could ever be’. A kernel of truth in Guldberg’s
argument is that possibly we do worry too much about the odd
fight or insult between equals. Clearly, there are skills to
develop in coping with provocations, and it is desirable to
develop such skills. But as almost all definitions of bullying
make clear, bullying involves an imbalance of power. It is not
between equals, and it specifically does not include the odd
fight or quarrel between reasonably equally matched peers. It
is difficult for the victim to defend himself or herself. This
difficulty may stem from lack of confidence; lack of physical
strength; lack of friends for support; being outnumbered; or it
may be related to prejudice, often because of gender, gender
orientation, race/ethnicity, faith or disability. For victims of
bullying, the damage to their development can in some cases
be profound and long-lasting.

THANK YOU SIR AND HAVE A HAPPY VACATION!!