Latest news with #P5
GMA Network
6 days ago
- GMA Network
Rider seeking cash-in services robs store in Talamban, Cebu City
A man, donning a ride-hailing app uniform, was caught on closed-circuit television (CCTV) camera holding up a store attendant in Barangay Talamban, Cebu City. First, the suspect pretended to be a customer. The incident took place past 3 p.m. on July 16, 2025 in Sitio Kalubihan, Barangay Talamban. The suspect, according to Talamban Police Station 8 of the Cebu City Police Office, requested cash-in services worth P5,000 of an e-wallet app, but the owner of the store has instructed the store attendant to always ask for the money first before keying in the request on the digital app. As the suspect failed to provide any cash, the store attendant did not pursue the transaction. Later, the suspect went nearer to the store attendant and pretended to purchase an item, and declared a holdup. Police investigation disclosed that the robber poked a knife at the store attendant. He carted away store proceeds worth about P1,000 and a cellphone worth P8,000.
GMA Network
15-07-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
DOJ prosecutors ask Muntinlupa court to reconsider De Lima acquittal
Department of Justice prosecutors asked a Muntinlupa court to overturn its ruling that upheld the acquittal of Mamamayang Liberal Representative Leila de Lima and her former driver Ronnie Dayan in a drug-related case. The prosecutors said in their motion for reconsideration that De Lima and Dayan should be found guilty of conspiracy to commit illegal drug trading, adding that the Court of Appeals' directive for the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 204 to justify its decision was ''not complied with.'' In the revised decision dated June 27, Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara insisted that the recantation of former Bureau of Corrections officer-in-charge Rafael Ragos' testimony on De Lima and Dayan's involvement in the illegal drug trade was ''sufficient basis for the RTC to uphold the constitutionally guaranteed presumption of innocence.'' Ragos had claimed that he and aide Jovencio Ablen Jr. delivered P10 million in proceeds from the illegal drug trade inside the New Bilibid Prison to then-justice secretary De Lima's house in Parañaque City in November and December 2012. In 2022, Ragos retracted his testimony against De Lima. 'However, the Honorable Court failed to disprove the voluntariness and veracity, nay, even consider, the earlier testimony given by witness Ragos in open court and in other venues, including the surrounding circumstances thereof, which the prosecution duly established by sufficient evidence,'' the motion said. ''Simply put, there was no comparison made between the original statement of witness Ragos and his retracted statement, and [no] explanation why the latter should be believed.'' Ragos' original testimony, the prosecutors said, was ''corroborated on all material points by the other witnesses,'' particularly on the two deliveries of P5 million to De Lima and Dayan at her residence and the source of the money. ''The corroborative and uncontroverted testimony of Ablen still stands,'' the prosecutors said. They also cited the statements of several Bilibid inmates regarding the raising of funds for De Lima's Senate candidacy, as well as those of Reynaldo Esmeralda, to whom Ablen allegedly recounted the money delivery incident. 'To set aside a testimony [that] was solemnly taken before a court of justice in an open and free trial and under conditions precisely sought to discourage and forestall falsehood simply because one of the witnesses who had given testimony later on changed his mind would simply make a mockery of our criminal justice system,' the prosecutors said. —VBL, GMA Integrated News
The National
09-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
For 80 years now, superpowers have used their UN veto like a dangerous weapon
The UN Security Council, established in 1945 as the cornerstone of global peacekeeping, was designed to maintain international order and respond decisively to threats against humanity. This year, as we mark the UN's 80th anniversary, offers a chance to reflect on the UNSC more closely. Sadly, this decision-making mechanism, particularly the veto power granted to its five permanent members – the US, Russia, China, the UK and France, collectively known as the P5 – has increasingly crippled the UN's ability to act effectively in times of peril, which seem to be growing in number these days. The veto, intended as a tool to ensure consensus among major powers, has instead become a weapon for advancing national interests, obstructing justice and perpetuating mass atrocities. From Syria to Ukraine to Gaza, the veto is one of the the UNSC's greatest structural flaws, undermining its credibility and betraying the principle of sovereign equality that the UN was founded to uphold. The veto system emerged from the San Francisco Conference in 1945, where smaller and medium-sized states voiced concerns over granting disproportionate power to the P5. It allows a single permanent member to block any substantive resolution, regardless of global consensus. Despite their objections, smaller states capitulated to the superpowers' insistence that the veto was essential for maintaining international peace. But the veto has frequently been wielded ever since to protect the P5's national interests. In law there is a principle called 'nemo judex in causa sua' ('no one is a judge in their own cause'). In other words, the decision maker in a case should not have a personal stake in that case. The UN Charter reflects this principle in Article 27(3) by prohibiting P5 members from voting on disputes in which they are directly involved. The problem, however, is that this restriction does not extend to disputes governed by Chapter 7 of the Charter, which covers the Council's responses to threats to peace. This has allowed permanent members to block UN Security Council action even when they are parties to the conflict, shielding themselves and their allies from accountability. The veto has become a weapon for advancing national interests The veto's misuse is evident in numerous crises where P5 members prioritised geopolitical agendas over humanitarian imperatives. The US, for instance, has consistently used its veto to shield Israel from UNSC criticism, regardless of the merits of these resolutions. Russia and China have similarly paralysed the UNSC in crises such as Syria, Ukraine, Myanmar and Bosnia and Herzegovina. In Syria, Russian vetoes – often justified as protecting Syrian sovereignty – blocked resolutions aimed at addressing mass atrocities and shielded the Assad regime. The veto has even been used to influence the bureaucratic shape of the UN, including the selection of the UN Secretary-General. In 1996, the US blocked Boutros Boutros-Ghali's reappointment, citing his publication of a report exposing Israel's deliberate attack on a UN refugee camp in Lebanon. But in recent times, it is the deadlock over the Syrian war that sparked the most global outrage over the veto and prompted initiatives to reform the system. In 2013, French President François Hollande proposed that the P5 voluntarily refrain from using the veto in cases of mass atrocities, such as genocide or war crimes. The French initiative, detailed by Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, suggested a 'gentlemen's agreement' among the P5, with the UN Secretary-General determining when a situation qualifies as a mass atrocity. However, the proposal's voluntary nature and exemption for cases involving 'vital national interests' rendered it toothless. The US and Russia both refused to endorse it. Another effort, the Accountability, Coherence, and Transparency (ACT) Code of Conduct, launched by 27 smaller states in 2013, calls for all UNSC members to pledge not to vote against resolutions addressing major crimes. By 2018, 116 countries supported the code, but the US and Russia remain non-signatories, and so it is likely to share the fate of the French proposal. The paralysis caused by the veto in the face of atrocities represents a betrayal of the UN's mission. It perpetuates suffering and emboldens perpetrators. The Security Council's failure to act in Syria, Ukraine and Recently the war in Gaza , contrasted with its selective interventions elsewhere, fuels perceptions of bias and double standards, diminishing trust in the UN as a whole. Reforming the veto system faces formidable obstacles, as P5 members are unlikely to relinquish their privilege voluntarily. Amending the UN Charter requires the consent of all permanent members, making structural change improbable. However, certain incremental steps could mitigate the veto's harm. Strengthening the ACT Code of Conduct by securing broader P5 buy-in, particularly from the US, could build momentum for voluntary restraint. Empowering the UN General Assembly to act when the UNSC is deadlocked, as proposed in the 'Uniting for Peace' resolution back in 1950, offers another avenue for bypassing vetoes in extreme cases. Public pressure and advocacy from smaller states, civil society and the world's citizens are critical to driving reform. Highlighting the human cost of UNSC inaction – millions displaced, countless lives lost – can galvanise support for change. The UN's 80th anniversary presents an opportunity to revisit the San Francisco Conference's debates and demand a Security Council that serves humanity, not just the interests of a privileged few. The veto system, once envisioned as a safeguard for global stability, has become a shackle on the UNSC's ability to fulfil its mandate. Reforming this outdated mechanism is not just a legal or diplomatic challenge, but a moral imperative. The world cannot afford a Security Council that stands idly by as atrocities unfold, constrained by the veto's iron grip. The time for change is now.
The National
02-07-2025
- Politics
- The National
Macron seeks breakthrough on Iran in first talks with Putin since 2022
French President Emmanuel Macron and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin discussed how to re-establish international control over Iran's nuclear programme in their first call in nearly three years. The two-hour discussion between the leaders – who stopped talking after Russia's 2022 invasion of Ukraine – was dictated by the urgency of the situation in Iran. The Kremlin described the call as "very substantive" and said it was France that asked for it to take place. Iran's nuclear facilities are believed to have been heavily damaged by US strikes but western powers now fear that Iran will leave the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Mr Putin said he was open to discussing Iran's nuclear programme within the 'P5" framework of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – Russia, China, France, the UK and the US, people familiar with the matter said. The Russian leader also said he could hold talks bilaterally or within a separate format involving Germany, the UK and France, known as the E3. France views the Iranian nuclear threat as sufficiently serious to justify the involvement of all five countries. Mr Macron is scheduled to speak soon to Chinese President Xi Jinping. Foreign Minister Jean-Noel Barrot on Wednesday said France was 'broadening discussions to other permanent members of the United Nations Security Council who were also signatories to the 2015 agreement' on Iran's nuclear programme, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA. 'It is in this context that the President spoke to Vladimir Putin yesterday,' Mr Barrot said as he addressed the foreign affairs committee at the National Assembly. France and Russia have diverging views on Iran's nuclear programme. Mr Macron recently sided with US and Israeli demands of zero enrichment, while Mr Putin, an Iranian ally, said during his call with the French President on Tuesday evening that it was necessary to respect Iran's right to the peaceful development of nuclear energy. The Kremlin said Mr Putin also insisted that Iran must continue to comply with its obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Strikes 'won't stop Iran' US strikes 'certainly damaged and delayed [Iran's nuclear programme] even though it is difficult to have a comprehensive assessment of those military operations', Mr Barrot said. However the strikes 'will not stop Iran from rebuilding its nuclear programme tomorrow', he added. He argued that a 'negotiated solution' was necessary to stop Iran ending co-operation with the International Atomic Energy Agency or leaving the non-proliferation treaty. Some diplomats hope that Iran will be open to negotiations despite taking a hard line against the IAEA. Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-e Ravanchi told the BBC on Monday that his country was open to resuming diplomatic talks with the US as long as further US strikes were ruled out. Mr Takht-e Ravanchi also said Iran would 'insist' on being able to enrich uranium for what it says are peaceful purposes. In their phone call, the Russian and French presidents also discussed the war in Ukraine. In a context in which both the US and Ukraine are holding talks with Russia, it was important for France to also open a channel of discussions with Mr Putin, informed sources said. Mr Macron asked Mr Putin to set aside old grievances against Ukraine and focus on the current situation. But Mr Putin reiterated his position to Mr Macron that the war was 'a direct consequence of the West's policy', which he said had 'ignored Russia's security interests'. Any possible peace agreement between Russia and Ukraine should have a 'comprehensive and long-term character' and be based on 'new territorial realities', the Kremlin quoted Mr Putin as saying. The Russian President has previously said Ukraine must accept Russia's annexation of swathes of its territory as part of any peace deal. Mr Macron, who briefed Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy before and after the talks with Mr Putin, has said Ukraine alone should decide whether or not to accept territorial concessions.
GMA Network
27-06-2025
- Politics
- GMA Network
Judge affirms De Lima acquittal in drug case
A Muntinlupa City court on Friday stood by its decision to acquit Mamamayang Liberal Representative-elect Leila de Lima and her former driver Ronnie Dayan of conspiracy to commit illegal drug trading charges. The RTC's action came after the Court of Appeals Eighth Division in April voided the May 12, 2023 decision of the RTC and remanded the case for failure "to discuss the specific proven facts as well as the laws upon which [the judge's] pronouncement of acquittal was based." In response to the appellate court's order, Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court Branch 204 Judge Abraham Joseph Alcantara insisted that the recantation of former Bureau of Corrections chief Rafael Ragos' testimony was ''sufficient basis for the RTC to uphold the constitutionally guaranteed presumption of innocence.'' Ragos had claimed that he and aide Jovencio Ablen Jr. delivered P5 million in proceeds from the illegal drug trade inside the New Bilibid Prison to De Lima's house in Parañaque City in 2012. In May 2022, Ragos retracted his testimony against De Lima. ''To reiterate and emphasize, the testimony of witness Ragos is necessary to sustain any possible conviction. Without his testimony, the crucial link to establish conspiracy is shrouded with reasonable doubt,'' the revised decision stated. ''Thus, the undersigned presiding judge submits that the original decision already clearly and distinctly stated the facts and law upon which it was based.'' De Lima spent nearly seven years in detention before she was released on bail in November 2023. The last of her three drug-related cases was dismissed in June 2024. — VBL, GMA Integrated News
