In his defense of the constitutionality of the DAP funds in the SC, sol gen Jardeleza admitted that it's unconstitutional but that the petition to declare it unconstitutional should be dismissed simply because it's moot and academic. They have stopped using DAP, ergo, not an issue anymore. With the govt's admission that DAP is unconstitutional, how can the SC justices decide otherwise? Pnoy can't escape by saying its moot and academic. Pnoy your in trouble. Your SolGen admitted DAP is unconstitutional.
No comments:
Post a Comment