Tuesday, November 1, 2016

1NOV16_159TH TIME_CONTINUING DAILY FOLLOW UP OF SET OF FOLLOW UP E-MAILS DATED MARCH 15, 2015

COUNT 159 RENEWAL

IN RE A.C. NUMBER 10084

_

ATTY RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT CASE

“It is a fair characterization of the lawyer’s responsibility in our society that he stands “as a shield,” …, in defense of right and to ward off wrong. From a profession charged with such responsibilities there must be exacted those qualities of truth-speaking, of a high sense of honor, of granite discretion, of the strictest observance of fiduciary responsibility, that have, throughout the centuries, been compendiously described as “moral character”.”
Schware v. Board of Examiners, 353 U.S. 238, 239.

By swearing the lawyer's oath, an attorney becomes a guardian of truth and the rule of law, and an indispensable instrument in the fair and impartial administration of justice, a vital function of democracy, a failure of which is disastrous to society. While the duty to uphold the constitution and obey the laws is an obligation imposed upon every citizen, a lawyer assumes responsibilities over and beyond the basic requirements of good citizenship. As servant of the law, a lawyer ought to make himself an example for others to emulate. He should be possessed of and must continue to possess good moral character.

EXCERPTED FROM

The Lawyer's Oath

The Oath: The Lawyer's Ideal

By J. Jose L. Sabio,

- 5TH TIME-15MAR16-QUIROZ MISLED THE COURT BY PRESENTING AN ILLEGITIMATE QUITCLAIM DOCUMENT
Atty. Quiroz presented the document "Annex 5" shown above as a valid quitclaim document though that piece of document was not verified.
- 5TH TIME_15MAR16_ATTY. QUIROZ DECEITFUL ALIBI ON WHY ANNEX 5 WAS NOT VERIFIED
In his effort to achieve legitimacy of the illegitimate "Annex 5" quitclaim document, Atty Quiroz concocted a fraudulent alibi on his sworn statement that Annex 5 was not verified because according to him, when Ms. Eva Rojas, the remunerations supervisor, asked me my residence certificate, I told Ms. Rojas that I do not have it with me and I will return to give it to her for verification purposes. That was a lie, deceitful statement of fact because if it was true that Ms. Rojas asked me my residence certificate for Annex 5 verification purposes, why when we met again on October 23, 2003, when I got my PRB (performance related bonus, Annex J), she did not ask for my residence certificate for verification. Let it be known that both Annex 5 and Annex J are not verified. Hence, Atty. Quiroz is again proven to be lying, he should be disbarred.
- 7TH TIME_15MAR16_PROOF OF ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ LYING BY VIRTUE OF HIS OWN PRESENTED EVIDENCE
As Atty. Quiroz wanted to prove his allegations of financial difficulties that led to the closure of the old plant he swore that in fact the closed plant was undergoing demolition. He even bragged about the contractor who will be doing the demolition. However, the demolition of the old plant demolished his credibility and sent him more toward disbarment. Why ? Because he is proven to be lying again, that Shell is undergoing financial difficulties due to the fact that the demolition costs Shell an incredible sum of PHP 129,950,000.00 as per his own presented documentary evidence. Is this the manner of a company undergoing financial difficulties, to spend PHP 129,950,000.00 for demolition work alone at the same time of having financial problems. Again, Atty. Quiroz is obviously lying, hence, he should be disbarred.

7th TIME_15MAR16_QUIROZ'S LYING BY VIRTUE OFTHE FALSITY OF HIS OWN SWORN STATEMENT

OIL Deregulation Law as yoke to the shoulders of oil companies doing business in the Philippines is a blatant lie. The fact is this law shielded oil companies from loses if ever there might be. As we can see, for every change in the cost petroleum products they can automatically adjust the price of their products to a point that is profitable for them.. Atty. Quiroz sworn statement that due to the Oil Deregulation Law it makes it harder for Shell to do business that made Shell decide to close an old plant is deceitful lie. Oil Deregulation Law is not a yoke but an oxen oil companies can ride on, contrary to Atty. Quiroz sworn statements.

8TH TIME_15MAR16_BITUMEN PLANT_ATTY. QUIROZ'S DECEITFUL INTENT TO CHEAT Atty. Raul Quiroz act of calling the BITUMEN PLANT as a "commercial business unit " and differentiating it from the "refinery business unit" carries with the deceitful intent to cheat. By exalting that difference he might be able to justify to terminate operators from Process 2 then hire new operators. But the truth is the "refinery business unit" is the same as the "commercial business unit". Both are plants ran and maintained by operators. Both have pipelines, motors, pumps to start and stop, valves to open or close. Both have raw materials and finished products and storage tanks and control room. The BITUMEN PLANT is just similar to the LPG Terminal (Shell Gas Eastern Inc.) that we ourselves are operating. In SGEI instead of bitumen, we receive liquified petroleum gas (lpg) in bulk quantities from abroad and the refinery and distribute it to different destinations in the Philippines and Asia. It is not that he called it "commercial business unit" it would be run by employees wearing tuxedos but with operators wearing safety suits. Clearly, Atty. Quiroz having sworn that" refinery business unit" is different from "commercial business unit" carries with that assertion his intention to cheat purposely to justify termiinating emplloyess from the old plant and hiring new employees for the BITUMEN plant.

9TH TIME_ 15MAR16_THERE WAS NO REDUNDANCY_DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 2

It is a fact that Shell closed an old plant and terminated employees. Likewise, opened a new plant BITUMEN IMPORT FACILITY and hire new employees.

19TH TIME_ 15MAR16_THERE WAS NO REDUNDANCY_DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE 1

It is not true that there existed redundancy of positions when I was terminated from employment.

- 19th TIME_15MAR16_IN VIEW OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE BUSINESS
This phrase "in view of the requirements of the business" was intentionally omitted from the sentence from where it is supposed to be included. tthis phrase having been taken out from the sentence by Atty. Quiroz's defense lawyers avoided showing that there was actually " no redundancy" at the time when i was terminated from employment.

5TH TIME_ 15MAR16_RANKING WAS RIGGED_CIRCUMSTANTIAL DOCUMENTARYEVIDENCE

This document is PRB(performance related bonus) paid to me about 8 months after I was terminated from employment, a circumstantial evidence that the Ranking which showed that I was second from the poorest work performer was rigged and untrue as Atty. Quiroz deceitfully promoted.

21ST TIME_14MAR16_RANKING WAS RIGGED _IN RE A.C NUMBER 10064 ATTY. RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT CASE

The Ranking from where the result of which serve as the basis on who is to be terminated was rigged. It was rigged due to the fact that the list of employees to be terminated was already prepared and submitted to DOLE (Department of Labor and Employment before the Ranking exercise was conducted.. This is the most vicious lie that Atty. Raul Quiroz is guilty of. He must be disbarred. I was illegally terminated from employment on account of Atty. Quiroz promotion of Shell's wrongdoing. I should have been reinstated back to my work until my retirement.

COMPLAINT REMINDER_15MAR16_REPUBLIC ACT 7641 CIRCUMVENTED BY SHELL ...PROMOTER GUARDIANS OF LAW SHOULD BE DISCIPLINED

RA 7641 THE RETIREMENT PAY LAW was circumvented by Shell as promoted by Atty. Raul Quiroz et al. This is unlawful. Therefore, promoters guardian of law disciplined administratively and/or criminally prosecuted.

ATTY. THEODORE TE_15MAR16_CONTINUING PERSUASIVE APPEALS FILED

This is the set of 14 persuasive appeals filed. Last update 11 April 2016

17TH TIME_15MAR16_TWELFTH PERSUASIVE APPEAL_SERENO LECTURES ARTICLE XI SECTION 1 OF THE PHILIPPINE CONSTITUTION

This is the twelfth persuasive where the Honorable Chief Justice Ma. Lourdes Sereno lectures the Philippine Constitution Article XI Section 1.

ATTY. THEODORE TE_15MAR16_ E-MAIL RESPONSE MODEL FROM THE PHILIPPINE SOCIAL SECURITY SYSTEM

Shown above is an e-mail response model from the Social Security System. This is the e-mail response which is most recommended to the Supreme Court of the Philippines Public Information Office. Atty. Theodore Te please be guided by this model.

ATTY THEODORE TE_15MAR16_9TH COUNT _PERSUASIVE APPEAL _ MALFEASANCE AND MISFEASANCE IN OFFICE

This is one among the set of 12 persuasive appeals which Atty. Theodore Te et al refused to take cognizance of.

ATTY THEODORE TE:_15MAR16_PERSUASIVE REMINDER_8TH COUNT PEOPLE IN GOVERNMENT E-MAIL RESPONSE MODEL FROM THE USA

Public Information Office as signature to your e-mails denies the constitutional concept of accountability. Instead, please sign your name with great pride, honor and dignity.and not just PIO, the runaway, hiding and no face guy.

SUPREME COURT_15MAR16 _89th FOLLOW UP_E-MAIL ADDRESS INQUIRY PERSONNEL NAME AND POSITION

The righteousness of the blameless will direct his way aright, but the wicked will fall by his own wickedness....Proverbs Chapter11 v.5

LAPITAN_15MAR16_67th FOLLOW UP_ OBJECTION ON THE MATTER OF SENDING NOTICE BY THE THIRD DIVISION OF THE SUPREME COURT

When pride comes, then comes shame; but with humble is wisdom....Proverbs chapter 11 v. 2

GEUS_15MAR16_66th FOLLOW UP_REITERATION OF DEMAND PAYMENT OF RETIREMENT PAY

THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE.

80TH PERSUASIVE APPEAL_1NOV16_TO THE SCP JUSTICES : RANKING, THE BASIS ON WHO IS TO BE TERMINATED WAS RIGGED

ODD ARRANGEMENT of a CALESA

The normal arrangement is the horse first before the carriage.

I purposely create this image for the sake of lawyer PIO Chief Te, lawyers Clerks of Courts acting Justices (without showing their authority to act as justices to adjudicate cases) Vidal and Lapitan and lawyers Justices Sereno, Carpio, Velasco, De Castro, Brion, Peralta, Bersamin, Del Castillo, Villarama, Perez, Mendoza, Reyes, Perlas-Bernabe, Leonen, Jardeleza and Caguioa adriot and brillant as they were but pretentiously and willfully ignorant of what a rigged ranking was all about. It is by merely seeing the image the horse behind the carriage is a signal blinking in their eyes that Shell might have done terribly outrageous here and duty dictates them to investigate, examine, verify the underlying circumstances about this expose and not rely on the lazy excuse where they merely assumed that the lower courts which passed judgment on my case performed their duty good under the presumption of regularity. This is the height of judicial travesty and laziness. You can not cite expediency to justify your laziness because it demean your efforts to seek for the truth and rightly dispense justice. May you find solace on the words of Chief Justice Sereno when she rebuked Atty. Coronel on the evils of the "condonation doctrine" and during the oral arguments on Tuesday, April 21, 2015. pertaining to Junjun Binay suspension case, how it would wreck havoc on the constitution, the good Chief Justice Sereno said,

"But when the matter is here for review, we can review everything from the point of inception from the very first time that Attorney or Engineer Bondal filed his complaint all the way up to the preliminary injunction of the Court of Appeals that is before us now."

HERE IS THE VIDEO RECORD CHIEF JUSTICE SERENO REBUKES ATTY. CORONEL

Now having these facts profoundly presented to you, it is now incumbent upon you to restore sanity to wrongful adjudication of cases GR-183273 and AC-10084 and Rithe Coronel's claim and demand on the release of his PRB (Performance Related Bonus)

Note: The Courts, Shell and her lawyers have long recognized my representation on these cases and he who responded from the PIO Office under PIO Chief Theodore Te who did not sign his name while avoiding responsibility and accountability should be named accosted admonished and reprimanded for having refused to recognize my representation by instructing me to hire a lawyer.

SINCE FEBRUARY 15, 2016

LIST OF EMPLOYEES TO BE TERMINATED

ATTY RAUL QUIROZ'S ALIBI WHY I WAS CHOSEN
TO BE TERMINATED

THE RANKING WAS RIGGED

FROM AC Number 10084

ATTY RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT CASE

FIFTH DECEITFUL ACT

4.1.5 PANG-LIMANG PANDARAYA :

(Contrary to 3.1.1 & 3.1.2.2 & 3.1.2.2 )

DAPAT UNA MUNA ANG PAGKAGAWA

NG RANKING [page 1 2 ] BAGO
MAGKAROON NG LISTAHAN NG
MGA KAWANING TATANGALIN

Your Honor, please, pansinin po natin sa

page 3 Nos.6&7 at page 9 No.26 ng

Rejoinder

"6. In identifying the three (3) more

employees to be terminated, the

Company adopted a system where rank

and file employees are to be ranked by

the supervisors in accordance with a set

of criteria agreed upon by the Company

with TASREA prior to the selection of the

employees to be terminated. The

pre-agreed criteria were (a) achievement

(b) capacity and (c) relationship.

7. The result of the ranking made by the

supervisors which is attached as Annex "7"

hereof showed that the Complainant was

ranked 66th out of 67 employees or

second (2nd) from the bottom of the ranking.

Thus, his inclusion in the list of those whose

employment was terminated."

PACKET 5 : LABEL 5.5.1 SHELL Rejoinder

p.3 Nos.6&7

"26. The company wish to underscore the

fact that the Complainant's termination was

based solely on the ranking made by the

supervisors of the Company, which ranking

based in turn, on the criteria agreed upon

between the Company and TASREA. Had

the Complainant not been near the bottom

of the rankings he would not have been

terminated. This would mean, however, that

another lower ranked employee would have

to be terminated."

PACKET 5 : LABEL 5.5.2 SHELL Rejoinder

p.9 No.26

Your Honor, please, sinabi po rito ni

Atty. Raul Quiroz, na ang pagtatanggal sa

akin sa trabaho ay tanging base

(based solely) sa ranking ng mga supervisor.

Kung wala ako sa bottom ng ranking ay hindi

ako tatanggalin. Sa ibig pong sabihin ni

Atty. Raul Quiroz na ranking ang tanging

basehan sa kung sino sino ang tatanggalin

ay tumpak nararapat lamang maunang

maganap ang pagsasagawa ng ranking

bago malaman kung sino sinong kawani

ang tatanggalin. Hindi po ba? Ngunit ang

tunay pong kaganapan ay nangyaring

nauna na magkaroon si G. Rico Bersamin

ng listahan ng mga kawaning tatanggalin

bago po naganap ang pagsagawa ng ranking.

Huling huli na naman po ang pandarayang

pagsisinungaling ni Atty. Raul Quiroz.

Tingnan po natin, Your Honor please, noong

mag padala si G. Rico Bersamin ng mga

kawaning tatanggalin kay Honorable Director

CRISPIN D. DANNUG, JR. ay petsa

November 28, 2002 at kami pong tatlo :

si G. Manuel (Manny) Trinidad, G. Lucio

(Jun) Valencia at ako, Antonio (Tony)

Buensuceso ay naroon na sa listahan ng mga

kawaning tatanggalin.

Samakatuwid may listahan na si

G. Rico Bersamin ng mga kawani na

tatanggalin noon pang 28th November 2002.

Bistado na naman po si Atty. Raul Quiroz sa

kanyang pandaraya at pagsisinungaling dahil

po noong ganapin ang ranking ay noong

January 29, 2003 na nakasaad sa Annex "7"

ng Rejoinder[page 1 ] na si Atty. Raul Quiroz
mismo ang nagpakita. Kung totoong ang

ranking ang naging basehan ng tatangaling
kawani, bakit po may listahan na ng tatanggalin

noong pang November 28, 2002 bago
pa maganap ang ranking noong

January 29, 2003?[RANKING page 1]

Si Atty. Raul Quiroz ay bistadong

nagsisinungaling. Si Atty. Raul Quiroz ay

papayagan ninyo pa ba na manatiling

abogado ? Dapat lang po, Your Honor, please,

madisbar si Atty. Raul Quiroz, dahilan sa

kanyang panloloko at pandarayang

kasinungalingan at sagad sa buto na

kahiyahiyang pagsisinungaling.

(Contrary to 3.1.1 & 3.1.2.2 & 3.1.2.2 )

PACKET 5 : LABEL 5.5.3 SHELL Position Paper

Annex "3" Letter to

Hon. Crispin D. Dannug Jr

LABEL 5.5.4 SHELL Position Paper

Annex "2" Letter to

Hon. Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas

LABEL 5.5.5 SHELL Establishment and

Termination Report

LABEL 5.5.6 SHELL List of Affected workers

LABEL 5.5.7 SHELL Rejoinder

Annex "7" Ranking[page 1 2 ]

The following Justices of the Supreme Court of the Philippines are DEEMED provided with copy of this "RANKING WAS RIGGED _IN RE A.C. NUMBER 10084_ATTY RAUL QUIROZ DISBARMENT CASE" through Atty. Theodore Te's PIO e-mail address on February 15, 2016 to the present and prayers for corrective administrative and/or judicial and/or disciplinary actions be instituted in due time.