When headlines banner and booming baritones break the morning air blaring a public servants connection to any controversial event, the first thing out of the window is critical circumspection. Mere connection turns to involvement, and involvement turns into conspiratorial participation. By the fifth sentence, innocents are convicted as criminal masterminds.

Innuendo starts a demolition derby with allusions and accusations tendered and coupled like runaway freight cars barreling down the tracks. Damage and demonization soon follow and before the second paragraph of a banner story, knee-jerk condemnation sets in as bylines, pen names or pseudonyms comfortably sit in the caboose.

A case in point is the rash railroading of vilification against the undersecretary of the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) barely a quarter into his tenure and absent of any evidence save for unproven innuendo, pseudo-analysis and chit-chat.

It is unfortunate that in some instances the court of public opinion where often media sit as judge and jury easily degenerates into wanton irresponsibility, scourging and denigrating, absent of civility, rules and the tenets of a legal system that keep us civilized.

Ask anyone of what they know about DILG Undersecretary Rico E. Puno and invariably four casual sound bites are known about him inequitably arrayed against the kilometric judgments that follow in this runaway locomotive.

One, he admits he is not a hostage-taking expert unlike three-quarters of the Philippine population, their uncles and 100% of media men, all of whom are self-proclaimed authorities. Albeit, of two undersecretaries at the DILG, he is the undersecretary for peace and order, solitarily tasked with that portfolio while the other is for local governments. Two, he is the president’s shooting buddy. Three, he was accused of receiving illegal gambling money. Four, he is not the Rico J. Puno.

The list is expectedly short as Puno is not one to hog the limelight. But note that a good portion of the incendiary coal that fills this demolition locomotive with hot air are accusations from a twice-redoubtable trigger-happy politician who once accused a former Senate President as behind an assassination plot against a sitting chief executive.

Against the little we know, let us array a tad more detail to perhaps form better perspectives and at the end of the day realize if we might not have been railroaded into a reckless if not an unfair condemnation.

First, Rico Escalona Puno is not Rico J. Puno.

Next, on the hostage crisis, as it unfolded, the often asked question was where the DILG secretary was as he is tasked by the constitution to govern over police matters. It was only later that his presence was noticed and even much later that people realized its fatal consequences. Both legitimate queries and the ambiguous answers that followed feed the notion that some enjoy vicarious credibility while others, lacking factional sponsorship, might be sacrificed to the wolves.

One columnist wrote, “Puno unwittingly serves as a buffer between the DILG secretary and the controversial Philippine National Police (PNP). If Puno was not placed by Pres. Noynoy Aquino as chief PNP liaison, (DILG Secretary) Robredo would have been under greater pressure to account for the bungling of the hostage rescue.”

Liaising and focusing on peace and order as undersecretary are distinct from wielding constitutionally-vested authority, responsibility and accountability as cabinet secretary. Puno’s appointment as undersecretary for peace and order did not reorganize the DILG hierarchy, much less did instructions to liaise and focus. Authority, responsibility and accountability remain with the secretary.

Verging on dereliction, claims of being “out of the command loop” are as self-serving as claims of not having been informed of the situation. The media more than adequately informed all and sundry, including the hostage-taker, and anyone armed with constitutionally-vested powers would have been compelled to act. That those who might have been derelict sit and judge over subordinates tasked to simply liaise and focus raises questions of gross inequity. It is a question of self-exoneration and morality. By choosing to judge, one can alter the blame-game, shed responsibility and accountability, and effectively exculpate oneself.

On Puno’s qualifications, the record shows that beyond being a shooting buddy, Puno was the President’s legal consultant in the Lower House and likewise in the Senate where Puno served as officer for public order and safety, economic affairs and local governance. He was also the liaison officer for the PNP and the armed forces.

On the illegal gambling issue, even the retired prelate who broke the story belatedly admitted he did not have an iota of evidence.

As for the accusation spewed under parliamentary immunity that Puno profited from illegal gambling, absent evidence, these can be filed among others that insinuate a former Senate President an assassination plotter, a former president a cheat and the various sightings of Elvis Presley.