^
+ Follow JUSTICE CONRADO SANCHEZ Tag
Array
(
    [results] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 330969
                    [Title] => Agonies in their gardens
                    [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case  rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination. 

[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [1] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 331145 [Title] => Agonies in their gardens [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination.
[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [2] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 331321 [Title] => Agonies in their gardens [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination.
[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) ) )
JUSTICE CONRADO SANCHEZ
Array
(
    [results] => Array
        (
            [0] => Array
                (
                    [ArticleID] => 330969
                    [Title] => Agonies in their gardens
                    [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case  rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination. 

[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [1] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 331145 [Title] => Agonies in their gardens [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination.
[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) [2] => Array ( [ArticleID] => 331321 [Title] => Agonies in their gardens [Summary] => As we noted in some detail in our last column, the Supreme Court majority in the case of Santiago vs. Comelec was trimmed from eight in the original decision to six in the resolution of a motion for reconsideration. A member of that majority joined the five dissenters in the MR. The Justices who inhibited themselves from the case rose from one to two. One Justice maintained in both the main decision and the resolution of the MR that the case was not ripe for judicial determination.
[DatePublished] => 2006-04-11 00:00:00 [ColumnID] => 134872 [Focus] => 0 [AuthorID] => 1532076 [AuthorName] => MY VIEWPOINT By Ricardo V. Puno, Jr. [SectionName] => Opinion [SectionUrl] => opinion [URL] => ) ) )
abtest
Are you sure you want to log out?
X
Login

Philstar.com is one of the most vibrant, opinionated, discerning communities of readers on cyberspace. With your meaningful insights, help shape the stories that can shape the country. Sign up now!

Get Updated:

Signup for the News Round now

FORGOT PASSWORD?
SIGN IN
or sign in with