The news and events that have filled the airwaves and newspapers for the past few weeks made me feel like I was in a Harry Potter book, in fact the first one, the Sorcerer's Stone.
In that book, the protagonist Harry Potter finds himself constantly on the bad side of Professor Severus Snape, Hogwart School's Potions teacher. Said professor always wears black and his cold stare made Harry's head hurt. We conclude that Professor Snape probably has an attachment to the dark arts given that he wants to teach the Defense Against the Dark Arts subject. The reader discovers, along with Harry, that that Snape has been threatening a fellow Hogwart's teacher in numerous occasions in order to steal the Sorcerer's Stone which was hidden somewhere within the school.
With these bits and pieces of evidences, including one where Harry Potter actually and personally heard Snape threaning that other teacher, Professor Quirrell, the reader, with Potter and his friends, cannot deny that Snape is in league with the evil Lord Voldemort and he want the Sorcerer's Stone in order to bring back the Dark Lord to power.
So Harry Potter and his friends Hermione Granger and Ronald Weasley devise a plan to steal the Sorcerer's Stone before Professor Snape does. So they set out on their quest, navigating the security system set up by the school's staff, which is a series of complex magical challenges.
When Harry alone finally reached the chamber where the stone was kept, he discovers that it wasn't Snape who was after the Stone but the meek Professor Quirrell. The professor reveals that Snape was actually trying to protect Harry from harm all along and that Snape already had suspicions that Quirrell was up to no good, which explains the threats.
The hearing yesterday made me felt like I was rereading the book again. We find snippets, little details, claims, accusations and counter-accusations in the hearing. We heard presumptions, rumors, allegations, commentaries, etc. In the end, the common jeepney driver, the tambay at the kanto and others, have formed the opinion and verdict that indeed the COMELEC Chairman is undoubtedly evil and has plotted to enrich himself by brokering deals with corrupt government officials and equally corrupt Chinese businessmen, and that no amount of explanations will help him clear his name. I mean what proof do we need? The Chairman is guilty until found innocent.