MANILA — Filipino drug convict Mary Jane Veloso said she has fully accepted her fate.
“Huwag kayo mag-alala sa akin kasi alam ko may magandang plano ang Diyos sa ating lahat. Hindi ako natatakot na mangyari sa akin ito kasi kung ang Diyos, ito ang kagustuhan niya, tatanggapin ko ng buong puso,” Mary Jane told her sister Maritess Veloso on Tuesday.
(Don’t worry about me because I know that God has better plans for me. I am not afraid that this will happen to me because if God wills this, I will accept this with all my heart.)
Mary Jane, who is now facing execution by firing squad said that what worries her more is what will happen to her family when she’s gone.
“Ang iniisip ko,kung anong mangyayari sa inyo kung wala na ako.”
(What I’m worried about is what will happen to all of you when I’m gone.)
Lawyers from various groups including Migrante and the National union of the People’s Lawyers have been helping to strengthen the case’s second judicial review.
The Department of Foreign Affairs also said that the efforts to save Mary Jane’s life will continue.
“We are also doing two approaches: the legal, which is the filing of the appeal for judicial review and the diplomatic, and the President has written for the third time asking for clemency,” Foreign Affairs spokesperson Assistant Secretary Charles Jose said.
Mary Jane’s sister Maritess meanwhile told ABS-CBN News while they are thankful of the government’s efforts in solving her case, they believe that the government should have taken action as early as April 2010 when Mary Jane was arrested.
They believe that the sentence should not have been carried out if the government acted the moment Mary Jane was arrested and not several months later.
“Before kasi hindi kami satisfied, dami nilang pagkukulang. Nung nahuli si Mary Jane April 2010, pumasok sila December 2010…pwede sana since day 1 umapela sila para siguro hindi ganiton yun desisyon,” she said.
(We were not really satisfied before. They have a lot of shortcomings. Mary Jane was arrested April 2010, they took actions, December 2010. They should have appealed the case on the first day and this decision should not have been carried out.)