Which is more important for a principled leader--trust or competence? I am asking this in the light of what happened in the IIRC report.
Justice secretary Leila de Lima recommended the filing of charges against DILG undersecretary Rico Puno. De Lima based her recommendations after the marathon hearings conducted to unveil the truth behind the hostage crisis last August 23. And what did Aquino say? The President wants the report reviewed by his legal team. For what?
Why waste thousands of pesos worth of the public's money for that probe and then, tell the main investigator that your report will be reviewed anyway by those not in the loop? Why review a report which is based on facts?
Will this be the nature of all probes on controversies and scandals that this administration will encounter in the future?
Will justice just be lip-service to this government? Will commissions like De Lima's be just "for show", and not really meant to serve the greater good, which is knowing the truth?
De Lima has shown extreme competence. Why be penalized for serving the people with utmost honesty and integrity?
Meanwhile, Puno has shown extreme incompetence and tendency for graft. Yet, he remains still in the administration, because of one simple reason---he still enjoys the trust of the President. After all that has been said and done, Noynoy continues to trust a person who already lied before the public, who already admitted meeting jueteng lords and their emissaries and who, already admitted incompetence before the De Lima Commission.
So, what is important for the President? A competent member of the Cabinet or an incompetent buddy? I just hope Aquino really knows what he is doing--what is right and what is really, really, wrong.