Moving Days: Of Investitures, Flashfloods, and Sarah Duterte

For me personally, these have been very moving days. The entry into the Ateneo de Davao was less bumpy (even emotionally) than expected, and Investiture into its Presidency meant celebration of the undying support and love of relatives and friends, the sincere welcome of new friends and co-workers at the Ateneo de Davao, and sights set on new challenges for educational engagement in Mindanao. Last Friday’s celebration of the Investiture of Fr. Jun Viray as my successor at the Ateneo de Naga University was similarly moving for me: a sort of happy closure, where the old office staff treated me again to kinalas, the “Board” to cognac, Lynette Mendoza to her botique lengua, Mo. Joan Clare to her exquisite apple pie, and the age of the Hobbits among Ateneo Presidents was proclaimed!

So as the only senior citizen among the Ateneo Presidents, I now am officially, “Kuya, Joel” among them! Thank God they rejected, “Lolo Joel.” I hope the hobbits remember that in the Philippines obedience is accorded to the kuya…

At Ateneo de Davao, developments have included: the approval and appointment by the Board of the Office of the Academic Vice President, Dr. Jessie Manuta; the creation of the Office of the Deputy Academic Vice President for Formation and the appointment to this office of the venerable Elvi Tamayo; the creation of the office of the University Chaplain for Administrators, Faculty and Staff and the appointment to this office of Fr. Kim Lachica; the creation of the University Council for Research and of the University Council for Outreach. To help me, the President’s Council has been re-formed meets monthly. Bong Eliab is now full-time Assistant to the President, Vinci Bueza focuses on relations with the CEAP, DACS, COCOPEA, and AJCU-AP, and Atty. Faye Risonar will now assist me in matters that pertain to Research and Advocacy.

Last Friday, July 1, many members of the ADDU community, with the full-support of my office, were mobilizing to support the Multi-Sectoral Indignation Rally Against Summary and Extra-Judicial Killings. It was a manifestation that had been spearheaded by Region XI Commission on Human Rights Director Alfred Sipaco and fully endorsed by Archbishop Fernando Capalla of Davao. Many groups, including Catholic schools and universities, we set to join this rally – not to point a finger at any person, but to manifest anew the value and inviolability of human life.

The rally, however, had to be postponed. Freak flashfloods had sadly claimed the lives of 32 persons, mostly children, and ravaged the lives and homes of those living in low-lying areas of Davao, including Bangkal. Jimmy Delgado, our treasurer, shared his fears for his family waters in his neighborhood reached five feet in the streets and three feet in homes. My secretary, Venus Rosello, was on her roof for three-and-a-half hours before she was rescued. Her messages shared her horror at having to climb to her rooftop in pitch darkness as the menacing waters rose. Reports were that many others from our community were affected.

With bridges impassible, Bong Eliab began Ateneo de Davao’s relief operations, first to its own members then to others, in his own car. Before donations could start coming in, we released our own emergency money so that help could get to where it was needed fastest. It did, thanks to many volunteers with four-wheel-drive cars and that versatile ADDU Dump Truck! We are most grateful to all the volunteers and donors who, as best as possible, helped bring relief to those in need when relief was most needed.

Meanwhile, allow me to say that the worst conceivable time for a demolition in Agdao was in this season of calamity for the people of Davao. While the local government and members of civil society were busy coming to the aid of people, human rationality and compassion alone should have prevented the Sheriff from carrying out his writ of demolition at that time. Sure there was a court order, and court orders have to be implemented, but not in a manner that disrespects the human situation of the people whose homes are to be demolished and not in disregard of the local government. In fact, in Sec. 28 of the Urban Development and Housing Act (RA 7279), the presence of local government in a legitimate demolition is required precisely in order to keep the peace. Of course it would have been nicer if the ugly punching incident had not occurred; Mayor Duterte has already stated it was not among her finest moments. But when anger is provoked by wrong, anger is not only justified, it is a virtue. The Sheriff was wrong not to have heeded the Mayor’s request just for two hours of stay of demolition in order to maintain peace. And the Mayor was right to have acted in defense of the people.

I look forward to the day I can meet her!


About Joel Tabora, S.J.

Jesuit. Educator
This entry was posted in Personal Views and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

48 Responses to Moving Days: Of Investitures, Flashfloods, and Sarah Duterte

  1. Roland says:

    Clapclapclap! I am enlightened.

  2. Amen, Father Joel. Laws, or court orders for that matter, must all cater to enhance the human life, respect a right, redress a wrong, and promote order among our people. To promote justice, we observe the maxim that no one should be above the law and the strict mandate which says: dura lex sed lex. But laws do not stand alone in our justice system, and our courts are not only courts of law, but courts of law and equity. I humbly opine that when the law or jurisprudence does not serve the purpose of building good society, it has to be struck down by the sovereign people, guided by the Spirit that giveth life. This opportunity comes at very defining moments.

  3. vincent carlo says:

    It’s almost the same story Jesus get mad in the temple. i love her!

  4. Mabel S. Acosta says:

    Both were doing their job according to each their jurisdiction. In that respect, both were “boss” in their own sphere of influence and call the shots. But in this situation, it was clearly manifested why a boss and a leader are truly worlds apart. Where a boss could sometimes be fixated only on the task at hand, a leader distinctly sees the bigger picture, and acts with discernment and with passion. The nation, not just the City of Davao, welcome leaders like Mayor Inday who mean business in the real sense of public service and public welfare. While the job does not necessarily require the skills of a pugilist, it certainly has a calling for the bravehearted. Mayor Inday Sara hears her people, and feels for her people, and leads with fire in her belly.

    Fr. Tabora, congratulations on your new post, and welcome to Davao City!

  5. lei says:

    very well sadi father..clap clap clap bravo

  6. i am DeeRawr says:

    i agree, Father! 🙂 welcome to Ateneo de Davao. 😀

  7. ben vasquez says:

    super LIKE!

  8. Reigne says:

    Eph 4:26 says, “Be angry, but do not sin.” The end does not justify the means.

  9. Sonny says:

    Nice to know that ADDU will have its DAVPF now 🙂 Structural/systems change in the works… a Tabora masterstroke 🙂

  10. “when anger is provoked by wrong, anger is not only justified, it is a virtue”

    I agree.

    And i just hate how the national news has taken up the punching issue with such a frenzy and has just forgotten about the calamity that hit the City. May polls ba on public opinion for two consecutive nights pero wala namang calls for help or relief goods for the victims. Mali.

  11. aweng35 says:

    Father, anger became a virtue when one has to risk herself to defend the lives of people of god. We should reflect the true witnessing of our living faith. if you love his people, you also love God.

  12. Gladys says:

    I am an alumnus of ADDU, but I do not agree with Fr. Tabora’s statement that condones Mayor Duterte’s violent act against the Sheriff as virtuous. Duterte clearly claimed that she wanted to delay the demolition to prevent violence but how truly ironic things turned when she used brute strength to hurt another public servant. “Mainit ang ulo ko” cannot justify any bludgeoning one commits against another human being. The sheriff was only acting as a messenger sent by RTC and would be in a precarious position had he not followed the court order. Despite doing what was legally right, the poor cop became the target of Duterte’s rage. Her actions were a clear manifestation of above-the-law feeling, and yes, a call for anger management classes. How can one consider Duterte’s action as virtuous? Clearly it was vicious!

    We all have the responsibility to say the right words, and Father, you are in the position to influence many of your followers. It is unfortunate, however, that you have chosen words that would re-direct people to believing wrong things can be justified. Is is because she is a Duterte? I am very disappointed.

    • ma says:

      Thank you. Well said.

    • Please understand that I am not saying that the punching itself was virtuous. Sarah Duterte said it was not her finest moment, and that she would take responsibility for this legally. But I am saying that her anger was justified, because from my viewpoint the sherif was wrong not to have granted the mayor her request for just two hours’ stay of demolition. He was wrong in his exercise of the discretion he had to determine the hour the demolition would actually take place. Had he granted the mayor’s request, the separation between the executive and judicial powers would not have been violated. The two powers, instead, would have been better coordinated. According to the Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992 (RA 7279, Sec. 28), even a court-ordered demolition must be done in coordination with the local government. It may not be done without adequate relocation. It may not be done in inclement weather. The Sheriff is not just a messenger. He must carry out a court order in a manner that is legal. He must respect, not spurn local government.

      If the end does not justify the means, the satisfaction of a court order does not justify an illegitimate demolition where for lack of coordination with local government hundreds would have been injured or killed. Even a court order in protection of property rights does not warrant a manner of demolition which flies in the fact of the humanity of those whose houses are about to be torn apart. I have myself been in the midst of trying to stop violent demolitions in the past. In the desperation of such situations, frustration and fear have startling ways of showing themselves. I do not condone Inday Sarah’s punches against another government official. But I understand where they were coming from.

      My position is not based on Inday Sarah being a Duterte, but on her being Mayor, the head of local government. It was wrong for the Sheriff not to honor her request.

    • Ching says:

      disagree. Go back to the story of Jesus when he lost his temper in the temple. it was violent and was justifiable.

      • Gladys says:

        It is interesting how you are using Jesus’ disappointment with his people to justify Sarah’s act. Jesus was indignant about the wrongdoing that His people committed, but is there a passage in the bible that delineates Jesus punching or physically hurting anyone helpless? Jesus’ anger was the righteous form of anger in John 2:13-17, and that kind of anger is called indignation. As I have said, Mayor Duterte has all the right to be angry, to be indignant. What I do do not condone about the whole demolition incident was Mayor Sarah’s physical assault against the sheriff. Now tell me how you can use the parable in John 2:13 to rationalize the illegitimacy of physical assault against another individual?

  13. east graeme says:

    @gladys: as i posted in a blog of another person claiming to be dabawenyo but cannot grasp the anger within us:

    have you rushed to the flashflood areas soon after it was safe to do so? i just wonder. because all those who went to help were all in a state of adrenaline high. so much to do, too many people. the devastation too shocking. sayang, you didn’t take the time out from your comfortable home… you would have understood the situation better.

    13,000 poor families homeless. 31 dead, mostly very small children. middle-class families unwilling to ask for help but obviously needing help with their cars drenched and rendered useless, their sacks of rice all muddy and soggy, and their gas stoves destroyed and the only underwears that are not muddied and wet are the ones they are wearing. with heavy rain still threatening to pour every night, and mister sheriff cannot wait to render 500 more homeless. i pray that you will not experience this so you will not be so self-righteous out there.

    • Gladys says:

      East Graeme,

      Are you indirectly swaggering about the great deeds you have done after the flashflood? You sound so. Please do not veer toward a different point of parley. I am accentuating here the point in which Fr. Tabora and I differ, and that is tagging the pugilistic action of Mayor Sarah as virtuous, in which I truly disagree. Please read again my point and pitch into that. Learn when to use the words “self-righteous”.

  14. Manoy Andoy says:

    @ Gladys: The sheriff was only acting as a messenger sent by RTC and would be in a precarious position had he not followed the court order.
    I am interested in this statement of yours. Yes, this is right. But the Mayor never against the demolition so the sheriff will not disobey the Court Law. The Sheriff based on the Sec. 28 of the Urban Development and Housing Act (RA 7279) as Fr. Joel mentioned did something wrong. He did not follow that Act. Why?

    • Gladys says:

      Manoy Andoy,

      I could only surmise two things as to why the Sheriff did not follow the RA 7279. First, he was probably oblivious about it. Second, he was carrying an order from the RTC (talking about conflict of laws). However, physical assault is certainly not the legitimate path to correcting someone else’s ignorance.

      • leo says:

        I hope it was ignorance. But reality is and my cents worth is that sheriffs, on his own, do not move or implement writs without a budget. Money moves things. Party asking for execution deposits in court an amount for execution, from which sheriff withdraws and liquidates later. Usually, this is small. And sheriffs do not even bother to withdraw from this deposit because they find liquidation cumbersome. So, what do they do? They ask the winning party for a bigger budget which needs no liquidation — for the demolition team, the sheriff himself, police, lawyers and others, including some corrupt judges, who will not issue writs unless money is exchanged; or even corrupt lawyers of the defending party, who have sold out to the winning party; or even corrupt local officials who will never intervene despite violence, because the winning party was an election supporter; and for whatever other expenses to justify even bigger budget. And money is not paid in full until full implementation. So, do not be surprised at all “bakit gilgil na gilgil” and throw all kinds of reasons, just so to collect the balance or full payment. In short, the cliche “I am just doing my job.” ay “gasgas” na. One should be more forthright – “I was paid to do this job and I need the full balance”.

        And as to physical assault, I disagree with Fr. Joel separating anger from the assault. I say both are justified. Anger is justified and virtuous. Assault is justified as well in the context of last Friday. Remember that RA 7279 UDHA is also a special law with penal provision. It imposes fine and imprisonment for violation of RA 7279. Therefore, for violating this law, one is committing a crime. So that, even before commission, one can be prevented from violating it. Or if a criminal is in progress committing a crime, he can be stopped on his tracks, even by a private citizen, in order to avoid further commission of violation of RA 7279. As some would say “a nuisance is like a stray dog which can be shot on sight.” In the same vein, a criminal who is about to commit or is committing a violation of RA 7279 is more than a nuisance.

  15. east graeme says:

    @Gladys: As pointed out in an editorial by Sunstar Davao today, citing this blog by Fr. Tabora:

    Republic Act No. 7279: Urban Development and Housing Act of 1992
    Sec. 28. Eviction and Demolition. – Eviction or demolition as a practice shall be discouraged. Eviction or demolition, however, may be allowed under the following situations: … xxx …(c) When there is a court order for eviction and demolition.

    In the execution of eviction or demolition orders involving underprivileged and homeless citizens, the following shall be mandatory: … xxx … (3) Presence of local government officials or their representatives during eviction or demolition;

    (5) Execution of eviction or demolition only during regular office hours from Mondays to Fridays and during good weather, unless the affected families consent otherwise.

    The sheriff is a servant of law, he should be serving the law in full knowledge of what law he is serving. In this case, the Urban Dev’t and Housing Act which regulates demolition.

  16. east graeme says:

    @Manoy Andoy: Why the sheriff did not follow the UDHA is now the subject of lots of speculations, which tends to put the sheriff in a bad light since people are putting two and two together in this classic battle between the landed or the moneyed and the landless or the poor and why some people will side with the moneyed when the law says they should side with the poor. But of course, those are all speculations.

  17. Ana says:

    Father Joel, it was wrong for the sheriff not to honor the mayor’s request. It was a virtue that Mayor Duterte got angry that the sheriff did not honor her request. It is a virtue that she tried to defend her people. But the issue here is not that she got angry but HOW she expressed her anger. She is a mayor, a government official. It was a golden opportunity for her to show her constituents that one can show righteous anger without being physical. Temperance is also a virtue.

  18. Sol says:

    Disclaimer: This is my point of view. This is my opinion.

    @ Gladys: Citing what our Father President had stated,

    “Of course it would have been nicer if the ugly punching incident had not occurred; Mayor Duterte has already stated it was not among her finest moments. But when anger is provoked by wrong, anger is not only justified, it is a virtue. The Sheriff was wrong not to have heeded the Mayor’s request just for two hours of stay of demolition in order to maintain peace. And the Mayor was right to have acted in defense of the people.”

    he clearly stated that he does not at any point l favors this punching incident. This means that Father Tabora is telling us that the Sheriff should have had heeded the request of the Mayor to attain peace and avoid the riot. And again, he is not in favor of such violence. (But then again, there was a riot before Sara even arrived.)

    Let us not forget that we make mistakes. It just so happens that this incident is heightened because of that punching incident. Let me take you back to what really had happened, its okay that the sheriff pushed through with the demolition BUT with this action, lead to a greater violence which made Mayor Sara heat up.

    And in the issue of viciousness, if you are indeed a true follower of Christ, you would remember that even Jesus, our redeemer had lost his temper when he saw that the temple which a place for worship and serenity was made to a marketplace. Can’t you see? Even Christ has made mistakes and has lost his temper. So are you saying that Christ is vicious because he chose to create a world without chaos?

    That’s why I think Father Tabora is saying that in The Sarah-punching-sheriff incident is not only justified but is a virtue.

    A person’s anger will not rise if not provoked. This is right.
    So I don’t see anything wrong with what Father Tabora said.

    And with the issue that Father Tabora is let’s say somewhat on the side of Duterte because she is a DUTERTE? Oh c’mon, Masyado kang politics. Walang politika, politika. WE TALK ABOUT GOVERNANCE.

    Father is not at all re-directing people to believe in what he does, this is his own opinion. Like you, you have your own. We respect that.

    Like what VM Rody Duterte has said last night over ANC’s Rundown with Ces Drilon and Tony Velasquez, WHAT WAS DONE WAS DONE. So what’s the fuzz about it? Mayor Sara is ready to be disbarred and be taken out of office,

    I agree that we all have the responsibility to say the right words. Since I am a student of Communication, I am an advocate of that. But what is really right? Isn’t it what is good for the greater population? Think about it.

    I suggest you read this article.

    • Gladys says:


      Sarah’s anger is understandable, but her expression of rage is UNacceptable, one that I am referring to as vicious. She came off like a hothead and lost her social protocol. Anyone can be fuming but we can all prevent the harm we cause by empowering ourselves not to be driven by strong emotions. Yes, easier said than done, but certainly possible to be actualized. I appreciate Father Tabora’s recognition of what triggered the Mayor’s irateness, but to call her anger as a virtue is a jaw-dropper, and this is his point that set me off to respond.

      You have clearly stated the laws that govern the demolition process, and to refute them is wrong, so I would not position myself in challenging the laws. Inarguably the poor sheriff did not consider the Mayor’s request (which by the way exudes her thoughtfulness for the people, if I may highlight that), and he may have broken the law also, but would that be enough to punch another individual, a public servant? Let us also point out the illegitimacy of physical assault especially committed by a public servant. By boldy saying this, I am in NO WAY discrediting the great things Mayor Duterte (and his father) has done for Davao. I am just stressing that her pugilistic actions were UNACCEPTABLE, and the kind that should be rebuked.

      And by the way, there is no need for reiterating Fr. Tabora’s statement as I clearly understand them. Its translucence made me weigh in about Mayor Sarah’s rage in the first place. Salamat though.

      Oh by the way, what do you say about Vice Mayor Duterte’s show of dirty finger as he lambasted the critics of her daughter? I’d like to present my position on this: His act is also something that need to be admonished. Great former mayor and I obviously liked him, but he could have said things better as he defended his daughter.

  19. Mitch says:

    Very well said, Fr. Joel. It is also a virtue for someone who has been in Davao for but a little less than a couple of months to see beyond mere appearances, and understand where seemingly outrageous emotions are coming from. You have certainly articulated what I believe is the sentiment of a true Davaoeno… I feel truly privileged to be part of the Ateneo de Davao community at this point.

  20. maria says:

    sa wakas! i have finally found a new blogger to follow (read) and a Jesuit! i miss the university..i miss Davao! More blogs to come Father.

  21. vinz says:

    I just remembered, the Law maybe harsh, but it is the law. However, the law is created for man, not man for the law. I ap Father Joel Tabora for such vigilance. Serve the people.

  22. vinz says:

    I just remembered, the Law maybe harsh, but it is the law. However, the law is created for man, not man for the law. I appreciate Father Joel Tabora for such vigilance. Serve the people.

  23. Unjustifiable says:

    Father, with all due respect, you are absolutely wrong in calling the act “justified”. Jesus’ time was circa 33 AD, ours is 2011. The context is different. If you punch someone (and a sheriff at that — an officer of the law) you go to jail. But, did she go to jail? No, because she is above the law. And she (and her dad) will continue to be above the law because of priests like you who calls her acts justifiable and who can’t wait to see her. Unbelievable! You should have condemned this act, Father. That could have been your finest hour.

    A lot of you quoted jesus’ rage at the temple as an example of a justifiable act of violence, so are we saying now that we can all wreak havoc for as long as it is justified? Of course not! It’s like saying that all suicide bombings (e.g., 9-11 in the U.S.) are justifiable.

    We have laws and we follow them. If the Sheriff was wrong, then we bring him to court. Not punch him. No one is above the law.

    • pie says:

      While I respect Father Tabora’s stand on this matter, I must say I am deeply bothered that he finds the mayor’s actions justifiable. Great leaders do not engage in fist fights when push comes to shove. They exercise restraint and self-control.

    • Ching says:

      You are so boring. Read your bible text again, face the wall and reflect.

      • Unjustifiable says:

        Ching you are the most boring person here. Your comments do not contribute at all to the discussion. Expound… and yes, read your bible over and over again, and face the wall and reflect, too.

  24. damereveur says:

    @gladys and @unjustifiable
    Yan,kasi batas ng tao walang compasion,love,mercy! Remember? jews elders/parisees,very legalistic to the extent of depriving justice,urgent need,peace & concern to the people. What I want is mercy, not sacrifice!cy! Remember? jews elders/parisees,very legalistic to the extent of depriving justice,urgent need,peace & concern to the people. What I want is mercy, not sacrifice!

  25. damereveur says:

    totally agree father! Its like the parable of the sheep that fell into the ravine. will u wait til the Sabath is over to save it? kaya yan charge to JESUS. The mayor is the good shepherd,na kahit labag sa batas ginawa niya just to save the sheep.

  26. Ups says:

    There goes the wisdom of an impartial, educated, discerning, and objective mind…of a person devoid of pre-existing prejudice, of a respected priest and educator……Indeed, the welfare of the people is the supreme law. (salus populi est suprema lex)

  27. justiceleague68 says:

    The mayor had all the right to be angry but never had the right to punch the sheriff.
    The sheriff did not start the violence in the area. As per information coming from the office of the sheriff, the demolition schedule has been moved several times and all the protocols and proper communications were made to the offices concerned even before July 1. Mayor Sara herself mentioned that they made plans how to proceed with the demolition and she wanted the sheriff to wait. The sheriff actually waited as he is aware that there is an on-going effort for the mayor to communicate with the judge who issued the order (the judge who issued the order happened to be the uncle of the mayor by affinity and a crucial party in this issue since he has the power to recall his order under the Rules of Court). Not a single house was destroyed in the area. Unfortunately, some people started committing acts of violence by throwing stones at the sheriff while he was surveying the area to determine the coverage of the order. In the scheme of things, the punching part was really unnecessary. Hope this information helps clarify things.

  28. LittleActs says:

    Nobody from the CHR took note of how the police pulled and hurt the people in the area. Nobody from the group of the Sheriff’s took note of the evil the insistence of demolition at the height of calamity.

    While it was not comforting to observe that a hot-headed mayor is leading the city, I would rather have her continue to lead my city because not a lot of mayor can show pure pure care and concern to her people.

    Yep, they don’t hit or inflict pain, perhaps, in front of TV cameras, but most of the time, most mayors have yet to see actions in their words.

    The mayor had foresight that a scuffle and violence would ensue, as vowed by the residents. But, of course, the Judge did not heed. He wanted to insist on his judicial power and the sheriff took comfort in it at the expense of the lives of others.

  29. peter says:

    I am a law student from Ateneo de Davao University where Fr. Tabora is the President.

    A lot has been said about the sociological implications of the actions of Mayor Inday Sara Duterte . The action, specifically of punching the sheriff couple of times on national TV while in the performance of his functions . The anger that brought about the above-described actions according to Fr. Tabora is a virtue.

    The legal consequence of Mayor Duterte’s actions is basic. As they say, even a law student knows that she committed direct assault under Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code for physically attacking the Sheriff , a person in authority, while in the performance of his official functions which is to carry out the writ of demolition issued by the Regional Trial Court.

    What appalled me most is that she committed it with obvious disregard of the law, with arrogance that can be equaled only by the ampatuans of the world, and with impunity that even Edgar Allan Poe’s character in the The Cask of Amontillado would pale in comparison.

    Forgiving her actions (or anger) as a defense to the poor is acceptable (even if she doesn’t show an ounce of remorse) but calling it a virtue is another.

    Is it right to punch another human being when you are angry? It is moral to treat another human being like a dog, just the way the mayor treated the sheriff? Is it right not to be sorry for harming another person? It is right to be arrogant? Well, if we are talking about Mayor Inday Sara Duterte and if your are Father Tabora, S.J, the answers would be “yes.”

    Welcome to Davao City Father. May I learn in Ateneo de Davao College of Law some of the virtues which you have.

    • Hi, Peter. Thank you for your comments, and for being part of our Law School. I hope that the blog that I posted today entitled, “The Monkeys Who Were Never Angry,” helps clarify my position. Anger as a response to wrong is virtue, for neither quietude not irascibility are appropriate responses to wrong. But the manner in which anger is expressed can be wrong, as I believe even Sarah Duterte has come to accept. She has stated that the punching event was not her finest moment; she has stated she will accept the legal consequences of her action. That said, I believe that the Sheriff must be made to answer for his actions relative to RA 7279, Sec. 28, and to his refusal to grant the request of a Mayor for just two hours of stay of demolition in favor of the peace. Unfortunately, we have not heard from the Sheriff since he was punched.

    • Unjustifiable says:

      well said!

      I wonder how Fr. Tabora’s conversation with the Mayor would go when they meet. Here’s my take:

      Fr. Tabora: Madam Mayor, I’ve been looking forward to meeting you. We finally meet. You were justified in your actions, Mayor. You punching the sheriff 3 times was justified. No question about it.
      Mayor Inday: I’m so glad you saw it that way, Father. I will do it again since actions like these are actually justified. Thanks for your blessings Father. Coming from the President of the Ateneo de Davao University, that meant a lot to me.

      Don’t go to bed with the Duterte’s, Father. You should not be condoning these acts. During my days at my beloved alma mater (Yes, ADDU) we’ve always been reminded about our everyday actions… that they are “For the greater glory of God” (AMDG +). So punching another person is Ad Majorem Dei Gloriam? I should have punched some of my classmates back then.

      • genuine says:

        Dyusko. You just go in circles. Please…all of you…read Fr. Tabora’s explanation. “Anger as a response to wrong is virtue, for neither quietude not irascibility are appropriate responses to wrong. But the manner in which anger is expressed can be wrong, as I believe even Sarah Duterte has come to accept.”.

      • Unjustifiable says:


        The problem with Fr. Tabora’s statement is that he did not condemn these acts. These are acts of bullies. Instead, he went easy with the Mayor’s actions and even blamed the victim (Sheriff). He said, “The Sheriff was wrong not to have heeded the Mayor’s request just for two hours of stay of demolition in order to maintain peace.” And he reiterated this in his next blog, yet there was no condemnation as to the acts of the Mayor.

        Imagine, the Mayor punched an officer of the law in front of the media, with moving cameras and all. She was so bold because she knew no one can touch her. Face it, the Dutertes in Davao are the Ampatuans of Maguindanao. And Fr. Tabora, President of ADDU, can’t wait to meet with her.

        Read Fr. Coyle’s comments on Fr. Tabora’s next blog. It will show you the forest from the trees. The punching incident is just one of the trees.

  30. Nora R. Morada says:

    pananapak and pag sabunot sa buhok a virtue? And a priest at that? Whatever happened to the so called Jesuit education? Sip-
    sip LOL!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s