IT’S the hoary conundrum about whether the glass is half-full or half-empty depending on where the viewer is coming from. In the case of Merceditas Gutierrez, she’s coming from resigning just recently as Ombudsman to find “vindication” in the decision of the Sandiganbayan the other day.

That is to say the graft court Sandigan’s approval of the plea bargain between the government and former plunder suspect Armed Forces comptroller Carlos Garcia, in the view of Merci, has filled up the proverbial glass halfway.

Triumphantly she cited the Sandigan decision as “a vindication of the Office of the Ombudsman and the OSP (office of the Special Prosecutor) … legal, regular and aboveboard, (thus) the best option for the government given the weak information filed by my predecessor, former Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo.”

Granted. In the light, however, of relevant or material information gathered by the Senate on the Garcia P300-million caper, couldn’t the Ombudsman or Special Prosecutor have gone to the Sandigan to bolster what might have been available?

Anent the weakness of the case versus Garcia, The Sandigan declared that from its inception the Ombudsman had no evidence for plunder. Thus, the prosecution could not have obtained a guilty verdict on Garcia.

Rather, the case would have been dismissed by the court “or dismissed through a demurrer to evidence, with both resulting in Garcia’s acquittal.” On the other hand, the plea bargain offered the government the occasion to convict Garcia for bribery even as it would enable the government to recover some assets from him.

“Without reluctance and reservation, the court viewed the latter option (plea bargain) as the deal most advantageous to the people,” said the Sandigan.

Apparently, however, that’s meat only for the gander at the Sandigan. Sen. Franklin Drilon, former Senate president and Justice secretary, observed that “overwhelming public opinion and legal precedents … militated against the execution of this plea bargain agreement.”

Drilon disclosed that while the (Ombudsman’s) prosecutors promised the Senate they would “ask the Sandiganbayan to hold in abeyance its ruling, he had received no indication that they filed an actual motion before the anti-graft court.”

The senator intimated that by then, he knew the Ombudsman and special prosecutor were “fooling” the Senate. “They did not oppose the plea for a lesser offense. They did not oppose the bail.”

In other words, the plea bargain agreement was a handiwork in progress and, I can but agree with Drilon that for failing to stop it, the prosecutors have shown gross incompetence. And, yes, should resign as Gutierrez did last week.

Otherwise, the prosecutors should be fired, if Drilon had his way, and preferably sooner rather than later in the wake of Special Prosecutor Wendell Sulit’s admission that, had they known of the Senate findings, “they wouldn’t have pushed for the plea bargain.”

Alright, Jose, you can wonder all you want on what exactly President Benigno Aquino III needs to get mad enough to kick ass. I don’t suppose P-Noy hasn’t done so for sheer fear of breaking a leg.