So there is an amendment to the ordinance regulating the sale of liquor in Davao City. And that is the requiring of buyers to present a valid ID every time he or she goes to an establishment to buy any kind of intoxicating drinks.
But will it deter habitual drinkers from pursuing their vice? May be to a very limited extent. But how many of liquor retailers will religiously comply with the ordinance? This is one aspect that the authors, and the other councilors themselves, must not have fully looked into.
Consider these. The retailers’ intention is of course to have their merchandise all sold as this would mean better return on investment. Thus, being picky so they can comply with the law would mean the retailers would be putting a bar to the attainment of the objective of their business. Hence, there will be no doubt about the merchants finding ways to circumvent the ordinance.
Of course if the amended ordinance has provisions for much steeper penalties for violators like bigger fines that could chip a block from their capital or profit, perhaps the retailers will be obliged to follow the restrictions, even if grudgingly.
On the other hand, we hope that the same ordinance has mechanism for its effective implementation especially in areas that are way out of the reach of police monitoring – say in the rural villages of the city.
Has the amended ordinance provided for the deputizing of barangay officials to monitor and apprehend violators? Also, who should be penalized if a minor is caught buying liquor in behalf of those who are of legal age? Should it be the minor who is simply complying an order from his elders, or the one ordering the minor to buy the liquor?
Honestly we want to have a complete details of the amended ordinance. Thus we hope that the City Council committee in charge of publishing any new ordinance as a requirement for it to be effective will have the same published in any of the more publicly read local newspapers and not in a “fly by night publication the number of copies of which can only be counted by anybody’s fingers.
******************************
Now who wants to beat this? We mean the marriage of 80-year-old Batangas Governor Hermilando Mandanas to lawyer Agelica Chua, 50 years younger than the governor.
Maybe not one will think of the marriage as motivated by love because the governor’s wife died only in 2022. Less than two years of being a widower is too soon to forget about the love that may have bound together the governor and his late wife for the past many years.
Carnal desire? Well, maybe for the 80-year old provincial executive it would be just a “desire” unless he will seek some assistance of a “kind.”
As to the new wife it is something that could be a subject of debate for a long time. She is a lawyer and surely her family may have the means, or something like that. Unless of course she was the governor’s “scholar” with condition that when the appropriate time comes she has to repay him in whatever kind the governor wants. But one thing is sure for the lawyer wife. She already has a husband, a father, and a grandfather all rolled into one. But definitely their December-May affair is one good story to tell regardless of doubts as to the intensions of both the groom and the bride.
*******************************
Why, what is happening to the investigation conducted on the twin killings inside and just outside a well-known condominium in Bajada, Davao City?
Why is the Davao City Police Office (DCPO) facilitating a “peace conference” among the Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (CIDG), the Forensic Unit team, and other stakeholders supposedly to expedite the investigation of the crime?
Are the groups called to join the peace conference doing their own thing without coordinating with each other? Are they on a “to each his own” activity in regards to the two crimes?
Frankly we could not understand why the meeting is dubbed as a “peace conference”? Will the DCPO please enlighten the public?
