04/02/2020 E-Library - Information At Your Fingertips: Printer Friendly implying such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment as is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction, or, in other words where the power is exercised in an arbitrary or despotic manner.[54] The definition has been expanded because now, grave abuse of discretion exists when there is a contravention of the Constitution, the law and jurisprudence.[55] Negotiate within the Constitutional bounds During the American Civil War, the Union had to win the Confederates and bring them back to the fold. It was the bloodiest war the United States ever had. But what made the war most pathetic is that it was fought by countrymen, people who called themselves brothers. With the recent hostilities in the South, I hope the day will not come for a full-scale civil war in this land we all proudly call Home. It is our solemn duty to avert that war. The aborted MOA-AD is a setback to the government. But the setback is only temporary, not a permanent one. The path to peace is long. But it can be travelled. On one hand, the government should be commended in its effort to bring lasting peace to the South. On the other hand, it needs to be reminded that any negotiation it enters into, even in the name of peace, should be within the parameters of the Constitution. WHERFORE, I vote to GRANT the petitions and petitions-in-intervention and to strike down the MOA-AD as UNCONSTITUTIONAL. [1] TSN, August 29, 2008, p. 14. "The Executive Department has decided and [is] stating for the record that the MOA-AD will not be signed in its present form or in any other form." [2] Annex "A"; Compliance of the Office of the Solicitor General September 1, 2008. "The MOA that was originally presented was a step in crafting a final peace agreement. By design, any MOA as part of a final peace agreement undergo a thorough review as part of our constitutional processes since the MOAs will be part of the enabling law by Congress and a plebiscite to implement the entire agreement. The action by the Supreme Court is consistent with that process. Moving forward, we are committed to securing an agreement that is both constitutional and equitable because that is the only way that long lasting peace can be assured. "No matter what the Supreme Court ultimately decides the government will not sign the MOA. In light of the recent violent incidents committed by MILF Lawless Goups, the President has refocused all peace talks from one that is centered on dialogues with rebels to one authentic dialogues with the communities, with DDR as the context of our engagements with all armed groups." (Emphasis supplied) elibrary.judiciary.gov.ph/thebookshelf/showdocsfriendly/1/47263 169/203