Lawyer Harry Roque correctly explained why the case involving the Maguindanao massacre is proceeding very slowly. Each new suspect or witness that comes into the case needs to be sworn in and identify each of all those others who have come before.
In other words, it is one whole cycle of legal procedures that gets set in motion each time another personality comes into the picture. And that simply cannot be avoided. In effect, what Roque is saying is that it is unfair to blame the judge for the slow pace of the case.
To be sure, the case could need a little shoving, if it has to come to that, instead of just the usual pushing. And that is because it is apparent no real vigor has attended efforts to bring in all those involved.
Here is a very glaring case in point: The massacre of 58 people happened on November 23, 2009. Last Saturday, November 24, a day after the third anniversary of the crime, an operator of a backhoe that tried to cover up the bodies and hide evidence was arrested.
Perhaps the arrest is cause for satisfaction. But look at it this way -- why did the arrest happen at just about the time of the anniversary? Of all the 365 days in a year, doesn't it look mighty suspicious that an important arrest must almost coincide with an important date?
The suspicion cannot be helped that some people could be out to make capital out of the case by promoting themselves with significant achievements timed to happen on significant dates so that the impact cannot be ignored.
If an important arrest is made at a time when the massacre is farthest from the minds of the public, the impact is certain to be significantly lesser. In effect, the achievement (it is no less an achievement) gets less publicity than some people might have wanted.
This is not the first time significant developments are timed to achieve maximum impact. Not that the world would end if they are not. But it is practices like these that help stymie the well-meaning intentions of others, such as bringing this case to a much quicker close.