Former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo yesterday found unexpected support from two individuals who had in the past been critical of her administration.
Former Senate President Aquilino Pimentel Jr. and retired Archbishop Oscar Cruz both called on the Aquino administration to give the former President com-passionate justice in the light of the filing of yet another non-bailable offense against her.

Pimentel, a staunch critic of Arroyo, said while justice must be served, it should be carried out with compassion.
“I am not a supporter of GMA but in the cases filed against her, there must be compassion because that is the right and moral thing to do,” he said.
He added that part of that compassion is making sure her medical needs are properly addressed., adding that she should be allowed to seek medical treatment abroad if that is the best option for her.
“They should let her seek medical treatment. That’s the humane thing to do,” he stressed.
Cruz, a vocal critic of the former president during her administration, during the weekly CBCP Forum, said in the filing of cases against her, the same should not be made out of vengeance or revenge.
“Justice should come from what is true and not from revenge or vengeance. Let us put a stop to vindictiveness because that will do the country good. You don’t a kick a person when she’s already down,” he said.
He also shared Pimentel’s view that Mrs. Arroyo should be allowed to seek medical treatment wherever she wants it.
Cruz also said he has been praying for the former president that she gets compassionate justice. “I pray for the former president. I sincerely do,” he said.
Cruz made the reaction after lawyer Anacleto Diaz, counsel of Arroyo, asked him and the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) to pray for the former president saying her condition is beyond any medical or legal issue.
“We seek your prayer because this is just too much. The former president needs all your prayers,” Diaz said, adding that they may seek a motion for reconsideration on the plunder case filed against his client before the Sandiganbayan by the Office of the Ombudsman saying it was filed without any basis.
“The crime of plunder has three As, amass, accummulate, acquire ill-gotten wealth worth at least P50 million. In this case, the intelligence fund did not pass through the (former) President’s hands--not a single cent. The Commission on Audit  even certified that all the intelligence funds were properly and duly liquidated and accounted for and yet they still filed the case and they even included the CoA commissioners who certified it,” he said.
He also said the timing of the filing is highly suspect given that it was filed a week before the President’s State of the Nation Address (Sona)  “We could not help but suspect that this is going to be used again as a prop for his Sona in the daang-matuwid slogan,” he said.
Diaz also disclosed that the former president is deeply saddened by the development at a time when the bail petition on the electoral sabotage case filed against her is being resolved by the Pasay RTC.
“Is this their way of making sure she does not go out of her detention in case her bail is granted because of its utter weakness?, he asked.
He also bared that the titanium implant on the former president had been dislodged making her difficult to chew and swallow. “She needs medical treatment and we had been told that she needs a doctor who does this kind of operation on a daily basis and we have sadly none that here,” he said.
Meanwhile Arroyo  and son, Camarines Sur Rep. Diosdado “Dato” Arroyo yesterday urged Congress to consider the early passage of a bill declaring “economic espionage” as a criminal act, imposing penalty against violators.
The Arroyos filed House Bill 1471, or the proposed Economic Espionage and Protection of Proprietary Information Act, to give adequate protection to proprietary economic information.
In their explanatory note, the Arroyos said economic espionage is committed, among others, by anyone who steals, wrongfully appropriates, takes, carries away, or conceals, or by fraud, artifice, or deception obtains proprietary economic information.
“It is also committed by anyone who wrongfully copies, duplicates, sketches, draws, photographs, downloads, uploads, alters, destroys, photocopies, replicates, transmits, delivers, sends, mails, communicates, or conveys proprietary economic information,” the Arroyos said.
The bill’s authors said proprietary economic information means all forms and types of financial, business, scientific, technical, economic or engineering information.
It also includes, but is not limited to, data, plans, tools, mechanisms, compounds, formulas, designs, prototype, processes, procedures, programs, codes or commercial strategies, whether tangible or intangible and whether stored, compiled, or memorialized physically, electronically, graphically, photographically, or in writing.
“At present, our laws do not give adequate protection to proprietary economic information,” the Arroyos said.
The bill provides that any natural or juridical person who commits economic espionage, whether or not in the aid of foreign nations, governments, corporations, institutions, or instrumentalities, shall be fined an amount equivalent to the economic value of such proprietary information.
The bill defines “owner,” as a Filipino citizen or permanent resident alien, corporate entities incorporated under Philippine laws, or any Philippine government department or agency in which rightful legal, beneficial, or equitable title to, or license in, proprietary information is reposed.
Under the bill, anyone who receives, buys, or possesses such information knowing the same to have been stolen or wrongfully appropriated, obtained or converted, and wrongfully solicits another to commit offenses under the proposed law.
Any person convicted under the proposed act shall forfeit in favor of the Philippine government any property constituting, or derived from any proceeds the person obtained, directly or indirectly, from the commission of such violations.
Likewise, any of the convicted party’s properties used, or intended to be used, in any manner or part, to commit, or to facilitate the commission of a violation of the proposed act shall be forfeited in favor of the government.