What we are witnessing today is an open war among the original conspirators of Edsa 2, which unconstitutionally ousted, arrested and jailed President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in 2001. At the center of this storm is not so much what they are saying as what they are not --- their need to justify to posterity what they did to Estrada, especially now that he is a free man.
The Edsa-2 conspiracy attained its final objective on Sept. 12, 2007 when the Sandiganbayan convicted Estrada of plunder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. But the partisans felt betrayed, and their unity promptly crumbled, when on Oct. 25 President Gloria Arroyo granted Estrada executive clemency and ended his six and a half years in jail.
“What happens to us now?” This was the question that immediately faced the old Edsa 2 actors who saw in the pardon the possible proof or likely seed of a political alliance between the primary beneficiary and the principal victim of Edsa 2. Nobody expected anything like it; not even former President Fidel V. Ramos seemed prepared to see what hit their ranks.
Edsa 2’s partisans could overlook any and all of Arroyo’s sins --- sins for which the overwhelming majority of our people, poor and powerless, had long demanded her ouster---but not this one. This was a betrayal of their common cause, which had put them above the rule of law and everybody else. Edsa-2 was all about removing Estrada and putting him away for a very long time, if not forever. It had no room for acquittal, parole or pardon.
It was Dostoevsky, rather than St. Thomas or any moral theologian or philosopher, who said that the most difficult sin to forgive is the knowledge of those you have wronged that you have, in fact, wronged them. Estrada knows who has wronged him, and has forgiven them; but they cannot seem to forgive him his knowing that they had wronged him.
These lords of selective morality never asked whether it was right for the Supreme Court justices to declare that Estrada had resigned “constructively,” when in fact and in truth he never did. Or whether any court of law could acquire criminal jurisdiction over a President who has not resigned or been removed upon conviction in an impeachment trial. They never asked whether the requirements of due process had been met before they put him on the dock; they simply accepted everything his accusers and prosecutors said – hook, line and sinker.
Thus, to them, freeing Erap was a crime bigger than stealing the presidency twice in four years; bigger than the unsolved killings and disappearances of political militants; bigger than the massive corruption that has turned government into a criminal syndicate and public office into a den of thieves; bigger than the rape of institutions, and the destruction of political, constitutional and moral values, not least of which are the integrity of the military, the independence of the judiciary, the constitutional rights and prerogatives of Congress, the sanctity of the ballot, the inviolability of the impeachment process, the incorruptibility of churchmen and the vigilance of the press.
Thus, they showed no outrage when military and police generals were shown to have cheated for their Commander-in-Chief in the 2004 elections; none when FVR weighed in to prevent Mrs. Arroyo from falling at the height of the Hello, Garci affair; none when the electioneering generals were promoted to powerful positions as reward for their crimes against the Filipino people; and still none when she showed every resolve to make the country the undisguised vassal of a foreign hegemon. They simply looked at the numbers in the bourse, and decided that so long as the profit-taking was good, questions about legitimacy, rule of law and justice were but “political noise” that must be contained. It mattered little to them that amid the moonshine about the economy getting stronger, the people were getting progressively poorer.
Who really profited from the “pardon”?
Perhaps the story can now be told. At the height of the Malacanang bribery scandal, following the allegations of large-scale bribery offers in the grossly overpriced $329.5 million ZTE National Broadband Network deal, an explosion hit the Glorietta 2 shopping mall, killing 11 and wounding over a hundred people. It occurred on the very day the Sandigan was hearing the oral arguments on Estrada’s motion for reconsideration (m.r.) of its Sept. 12 decision. Mrs. Arroyo’s top defense and security officials had called it a terrorist act but could not produce a credible terrorist to claim it; it threatened to see Mrs. Arroyo finally toppling over. All her flanks were exposed, and she stood virtually alone.
Then a recently retired Western diplomat planed in and sat down with certain high government officials. They reportedly discussed the possibility of forming a transition team to run the post-Arroyo government. But even walls have ears, and this apparently quickly reached Malacanang. So Mrs. Arroyo reacted with lightning speed, and fast-tracked Estrada’s pardon. Her negotiators got Erap’s lawyers to withdraw his well-argued m.r., which showed so clearly and convincingly why the court had erred in convicting him of plunder, and instead write her a letter asking for pardon.
Without Estrada having to say anything himself, this was enough, for Malacanang’s purposes, to send out a signal to the outside world that Erap and the masa had decided to back the beleaguered president. It was pure perception play, a clever manipulation of images and symbols. As soon as news of Estrada’s pardon leaked out, some proposed key players in the proposed transition team fell under the weather and got scarce. At Glorietta, the terrorism theory quickly gasified into an industrial accident, thereby eliminating the possible involvement of any “terrorist” or government agent.
None of these was apparently known to Estrada. Upon his lawyers’ advice, he had authorized his m.r.’s withdrawal and the request for pardon in good faith, not realizing that in consenting to this political maneuver, he was in fact saving her from the inglorious end, which so many had longed for and long foretold.
To most of Erap’s supporters, Mrs. Arroyo owes Erap and the nation a debt of justice, which must be paid in full. Stealing the presidency is a far graver crime than looting the treasury; it demands restitution. They see the pardon as a puny and grossly imperfect attempt on Mrs. Arroyo’s part to make amends to Erap for usurping his office in 2001. They also see it as tacit recognition on her part that Estrada’s case was primarily political from beginning to end, and that pardoning him after conviction was one way she could, if ever so slightly, try to salve her own conscience.
This was why although the masa seemed genuinely happy to see their old idol back, many were not so happy that, after fighting for justice for so long, he had to withdraw his m.r. and ask for pardon from his oppressor, who needed the pardon much more than he did. Thus when Erap publicly thanked Mrs. Arroyo for her act of clemency in San Juan, and asked his hometown crowd to applaud, they could not bring themselves to do so; some of them literally booed.
Because they love Erap, the masa will respect his decision and will not criticize it. But they are not likely to support her continued stay in office. For his part, because he is essentially a grateful man, he will probably continue to thank Mrs. Arroyo, despite his having lost to her his presidency and his personal liberty for six and a half years. But he has no obligation to save her from her inevitable fate.
The fire now burns like the California fire in the open field. It will rage on until the structure called the Arroyo regime is reduced to ashes. Estrada has no reason to burn down with it.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Why accident story won’t wash
The evolving official wisdom is that the Oct. 19 Glorietta 2 shopping mall explosion, which left 11 dead and over 100 wounded, was caused by an accumulation of methane gas inside the basement catching fire and causing a 3,500-liter diesel tank to explode. It won’t wash.
Many reasonable men will sooner believe that white is black than accept it. There is simply too much going against it. Both National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales and Armed Forces Chief of Staff General Hermogenes Esperon had called it an “an act of terrorism.” Somebody had tried to recycle the so-called Rajah Solaiman Group (RSG) to claim credit for the crime. Sources at the Philippine National Police (PNP) bomb data center and crime lab had claimed evidence of RDX (Royal Demolition eXplosive) and Composition C-4, which uses RDX as its base, at the site.
Some chemical engineering professors had rejected the accident story, based on their scientific knowledge of the properties and characteristics of diesel fuel and methane gas. Diesel fuel, they pointed out, will burn and cause a fire---yet there was no fire----and methane gas will explode only from extreme heat, at least 110 degrees Celsius or higher, but not at ambient room temperature of 28 -30 degrees Celsius.
Finally, some foreign forensic experts were said to have established the use of C-4. At least one foreign naval personnel, who was reportedly allergic to RDX, was said to have developed blisters in his hands upon entering the scene. A forensics report was said to have been submitted to some foreign embassies. Sources who claim to have seen the report say the experts estimate some five kilograms of C-4 was used, mounted as shaped in columns, a design reportedly consistent with what is used by military Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EODs) units, and similar to that used by the U.S. Special Forces.
Shaped charges, according to ordnance literature, are meant to direct the detonation wave and focus the energy of the explosion. These are normally used to pierce armor or cut metal; if placed on a pillar, they will destroy the pillar and whatever structure it supports. The report suggests the probable involvement of personnel with special military expertise, the sources said.
It is a pity that the men from the FBI, U.S. Navy SEALS and Australian Federal Police, whose presence at the site has been well noted by the press, would probably not be in any position to confirm or deny the story the government will put out, unless so authorized by their respective governments. But it will not be their governments’ business to confirm or contradict Manila’s official story. For this reason, it is unlikely the alleged foreign forensics report will be released by any embassy.
But reason is still our best tool for analyzing the relevant facts and theories. A finding of “terrorist act” compels the government to produce the “terrorists,” and the attempt to bring in the RSG was a complete farce. Failure to produce a credible terrorist would only validate Senator-detainee Antonio Trillanes IV’s charge against Gonzales and Esperon as the brains behind the blast. It would ultimately deepen President Arroyo’s moral crisis which had been temporarily snowed under the Glorietta story. A finding of “industrial accident” on the other hand shifts the burden to the owners of Glorietta.
The sudden arrival of the accident story follows a pattern last seen in the Malacanang bribery scandal. On Tuesday, Oct. 23, several governors signed a full-page ad denying previous stories about the unexplained distribution of P500,000 in cash inside Malacanang on Oct. 11. The very next day, Wednesday, Oct. 24, two officers of the League of Provinces of the Philippines confirmed what they had previously denied but claimed that the money, exposed by Pampanga priest-governor Ed Panlilio and Bulacan Governor Joselito Mendoza who both got P500,000 each, reportedly came from their non-revenue generating association of provincial governors. The “yes, it was a bomb, no, there wasn’t a bomb” story follows the same consistent pattern of inconsistency.
Now, despite all the data that argue against it, an accident is still within the realm of possibility. The only trouble is that even if was, in fact, truly an accident, and nothing but an accident, nobody will believe the story. The government has zero or below zero credibility. Having lied too often, openly, crudely, and routinely, the government cannot expect to be believed whenever it lies, or even when in exceptional instances it decides to tell the truth. Because those in power have openly and flagrantly violated so many laws without being punished or held to account, people have a tendency to presume them guilty even of crimes they have not committed. This is a government that has lost its reason for being, these are officials who have lost every reason to be in office. The solution is not to change the story, but to change those telling the story.
Nothing we have said here will prevent the regime from declaring an industrial accident, if they have already decided to do so. Then they will declare the matter closed. It is to be hoped, though, that before they do so, they will at the very least take the following steps:
1) Require Gonzales and Esperon to explain the basis of their original statement that the explosion was “an act of terrorism.” Since this contradicts the accident story, it would mean their statement was completely irresponsible, unbecoming of the dignity of their high office. If they do nothing, they should be considered “constructively resigned,” to use the famous formulation of Chief Justice Reynato Puno.
2) Fire those who gave official currency to the bogus claim of RSG, if they are in government, and charge them in court, whoever they are.
3) Identify the PNP sources who had reported evidence of RDX and C-4, ask them to produce the evidence, and punish them appropriately if they cannot.
4) Require Senator-detainee Antonio Trillanes IV to either reaffirm or withdraw his allegation against Gonzales and Esperon as the mastermind of the blast. Allow him to appear before a committee of his peers at the Senate, as an exception to the general prohibition on his attending the sessions of the Senate.
Perhaps by doing these, the government may yet hope to convince some people that the explosion was not at all its handiwork. This, however, will not prevent those who believe that if it was Divine Providence, rather than venal men, that had picked Glorietta as the setting of this tragedy, then it must have a clear and urgent message for Mrs. Gloria Arroyo. The Lord has heard the cries of his people, and He wants her to set them free. She, like the Pharaoh long before her, must take heed, or else the land will reek of death from terrible plagues.
Many reasonable men will sooner believe that white is black than accept it. There is simply too much going against it. Both National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales and Armed Forces Chief of Staff General Hermogenes Esperon had called it an “an act of terrorism.” Somebody had tried to recycle the so-called Rajah Solaiman Group (RSG) to claim credit for the crime. Sources at the Philippine National Police (PNP) bomb data center and crime lab had claimed evidence of RDX (Royal Demolition eXplosive) and Composition C-4, which uses RDX as its base, at the site.
Some chemical engineering professors had rejected the accident story, based on their scientific knowledge of the properties and characteristics of diesel fuel and methane gas. Diesel fuel, they pointed out, will burn and cause a fire---yet there was no fire----and methane gas will explode only from extreme heat, at least 110 degrees Celsius or higher, but not at ambient room temperature of 28 -30 degrees Celsius.
Finally, some foreign forensic experts were said to have established the use of C-4. At least one foreign naval personnel, who was reportedly allergic to RDX, was said to have developed blisters in his hands upon entering the scene. A forensics report was said to have been submitted to some foreign embassies. Sources who claim to have seen the report say the experts estimate some five kilograms of C-4 was used, mounted as shaped in columns, a design reportedly consistent with what is used by military Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EODs) units, and similar to that used by the U.S. Special Forces.
Shaped charges, according to ordnance literature, are meant to direct the detonation wave and focus the energy of the explosion. These are normally used to pierce armor or cut metal; if placed on a pillar, they will destroy the pillar and whatever structure it supports. The report suggests the probable involvement of personnel with special military expertise, the sources said.
It is a pity that the men from the FBI, U.S. Navy SEALS and Australian Federal Police, whose presence at the site has been well noted by the press, would probably not be in any position to confirm or deny the story the government will put out, unless so authorized by their respective governments. But it will not be their governments’ business to confirm or contradict Manila’s official story. For this reason, it is unlikely the alleged foreign forensics report will be released by any embassy.
But reason is still our best tool for analyzing the relevant facts and theories. A finding of “terrorist act” compels the government to produce the “terrorists,” and the attempt to bring in the RSG was a complete farce. Failure to produce a credible terrorist would only validate Senator-detainee Antonio Trillanes IV’s charge against Gonzales and Esperon as the brains behind the blast. It would ultimately deepen President Arroyo’s moral crisis which had been temporarily snowed under the Glorietta story. A finding of “industrial accident” on the other hand shifts the burden to the owners of Glorietta.
The sudden arrival of the accident story follows a pattern last seen in the Malacanang bribery scandal. On Tuesday, Oct. 23, several governors signed a full-page ad denying previous stories about the unexplained distribution of P500,000 in cash inside Malacanang on Oct. 11. The very next day, Wednesday, Oct. 24, two officers of the League of Provinces of the Philippines confirmed what they had previously denied but claimed that the money, exposed by Pampanga priest-governor Ed Panlilio and Bulacan Governor Joselito Mendoza who both got P500,000 each, reportedly came from their non-revenue generating association of provincial governors. The “yes, it was a bomb, no, there wasn’t a bomb” story follows the same consistent pattern of inconsistency.
Now, despite all the data that argue against it, an accident is still within the realm of possibility. The only trouble is that even if was, in fact, truly an accident, and nothing but an accident, nobody will believe the story. The government has zero or below zero credibility. Having lied too often, openly, crudely, and routinely, the government cannot expect to be believed whenever it lies, or even when in exceptional instances it decides to tell the truth. Because those in power have openly and flagrantly violated so many laws without being punished or held to account, people have a tendency to presume them guilty even of crimes they have not committed. This is a government that has lost its reason for being, these are officials who have lost every reason to be in office. The solution is not to change the story, but to change those telling the story.
Nothing we have said here will prevent the regime from declaring an industrial accident, if they have already decided to do so. Then they will declare the matter closed. It is to be hoped, though, that before they do so, they will at the very least take the following steps:
1) Require Gonzales and Esperon to explain the basis of their original statement that the explosion was “an act of terrorism.” Since this contradicts the accident story, it would mean their statement was completely irresponsible, unbecoming of the dignity of their high office. If they do nothing, they should be considered “constructively resigned,” to use the famous formulation of Chief Justice Reynato Puno.
2) Fire those who gave official currency to the bogus claim of RSG, if they are in government, and charge them in court, whoever they are.
3) Identify the PNP sources who had reported evidence of RDX and C-4, ask them to produce the evidence, and punish them appropriately if they cannot.
4) Require Senator-detainee Antonio Trillanes IV to either reaffirm or withdraw his allegation against Gonzales and Esperon as the mastermind of the blast. Allow him to appear before a committee of his peers at the Senate, as an exception to the general prohibition on his attending the sessions of the Senate.
Perhaps by doing these, the government may yet hope to convince some people that the explosion was not at all its handiwork. This, however, will not prevent those who believe that if it was Divine Providence, rather than venal men, that had picked Glorietta as the setting of this tragedy, then it must have a clear and urgent message for Mrs. Gloria Arroyo. The Lord has heard the cries of his people, and He wants her to set them free. She, like the Pharaoh long before her, must take heed, or else the land will reek of death from terrible plagues.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Why there’s no tidal support as in 9/11
Neither National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales nor Armed Forces Chief of Staff Hermogenes Esperon or anyone in their employ need to have planted Royal Demolition eXplosive (RDX) or Composition C-4 at the Glorietta 2 shopping mall last Friday for them to assume responsibility for the incident that has so far claimed at least 11 lives and wounded over 120 innocent civilians.
In more civilized and decent jurisdictions, the thing to do, even before the culprits are identified and hunted down, is for those in command to apologize to the nation that the incident, regardless of were behind it, had occurred, and for them to formally step down. It helps to assuage the sorrow and anger of the nation.
The incident need not even have cost lives. If memory serves, one defense minister resigned after the wingtip of a military plane brushed against a civilian aircraft on the ground, causing no injury to anyone or damage to either plane. The minister was nowhere near the scene, but he felt it should never have happened, and he felt personally responsible. He held the honor of his office higher than his personal claim to it, and the honor of the nation higher than his own.
Both Gonzales and Esperon have been tagged as the alleged brains behind the bombing. Senator Antonio Trillanes IV has offered no proof of his accusation, and Esperon has vowed to investigate the former navy lieutenant senior grade who is under military custody for his alleged role in the 2003 Oakwood mutiny. Esperon gave a clear indication of where he wants to go when he said that all the C-4 in the inventory of the Armed Forces had been properly accounted for, except for what had been recorded as “stolen” prior to the Oakwood affair.
Given the gravity of his charge, Trillanes has the duty to substantiate it, even though many people seem ready to believe, even without proof, the worst things said against the administration. But this should not happen in a close-door investigation conducted by his jailers. One way to do this is for the Senate to create an ad hoc committee for this specific purpose. This is not without precedent. In 1960 the House of Representatives named a 15-man committee to investigate charges of bribery made by then Congressman Sergio Osmena, Jr. against President Carlos P. Garcia. When Osmena failed to validate his charges, the House suspended him for 15 months.
At the same time, an independent investigation of the bombing, an idea supported by Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., should now be carried out, with the help of well-known outside institutions like the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and Britain’s Scotland Yard. This should insulate the search for truth from those who may want to dictate or influence the conduct of the investigation or its results. The ideal setting would be a new government with completely new officials to support such an investigation.
All sorts of cockamamie theories have been advanced to explain the blast. After Gonzales and Esperon had called it a terrorist act, sources at the Philippine National Police Bomb Data Center and crime laboratory reported traces of RDX and C-4 from the scene of the blast. RDX is an explosive that works by itself or in combination with other ingredients in explosives, while C-4 is a composition that uses RDX as its base.
But where real terrorists usually claim credit for their deed at the first breaking news, it took the so-called Rajah Solaiman Group (RSG) more than 24 hours to send a text message lamely owning the crime, and demanding even more lamely the release of some imprisoned brethren, if the government did not want to see more bodies.
In the worst written film script, the terrorists would demand the release of their imprisoned brethren, as a necessary condition for them not to poison the water system, release the rockets, or blast the football stadium in the middle of a championship game. Not only is the RSG script unique, RSG itself is more mythical than real; it does not appear in any credible website monitoring terrorism. Obviously, whoever wrote the script was not much concerned with sounding credible.
After the RSG yarn failed to wash, the police dismissed earlier findings of RDX and C4, and advanced the theory that the explosion could have been triggered by fumes leaking from a diesel fuel container or methane gas from a septic tank and igniting inside the concrete basement. This is quite a jump.
If this theory is sustained, Ayala Land, Inc, which owns the mall, could end up answering charges upon charges of criminal neglect, and having to pay millions, if not billions, in indemnity claims. It could rearrange the listing of billionaires in the next issue of Forbes magazine.
No sixth sense is needed to see that the Glorietta bombing has indeed displaced the Malacanang bribery scandal from the news headlines. This need not mystify anyone; this is how the media have long behaved, here and elsewhere. But it would be wrong to believe that the bombing has taken the heat off Mrs. Arroyo for her role in the latest Malacanang bribery scandal, and that the people are ready to see her conduct the business of the presidency as usual.
A close Arroyo confidante has been heard to wonder why while all of America and most of mankind rallied behind George W. Bush after 9/11, so much distrust and outright accusation greeted Mrs. Arroyo after the Glorietta explosion. I take that as a perfectly innocent remark, not an expression of disappointment of someone who might have thought that if the Glorietta was bombed, it would unleash a tsunami of sympathy and support for Mrs. Arroyo’s continued rule.
Perhaps the explanation is really simple. Our people had already decided they have had enough of Mrs. Arroyo, and that the Glorietta bombing has merely postponed the inevitable.
In more civilized and decent jurisdictions, the thing to do, even before the culprits are identified and hunted down, is for those in command to apologize to the nation that the incident, regardless of were behind it, had occurred, and for them to formally step down. It helps to assuage the sorrow and anger of the nation.
The incident need not even have cost lives. If memory serves, one defense minister resigned after the wingtip of a military plane brushed against a civilian aircraft on the ground, causing no injury to anyone or damage to either plane. The minister was nowhere near the scene, but he felt it should never have happened, and he felt personally responsible. He held the honor of his office higher than his personal claim to it, and the honor of the nation higher than his own.
Both Gonzales and Esperon have been tagged as the alleged brains behind the bombing. Senator Antonio Trillanes IV has offered no proof of his accusation, and Esperon has vowed to investigate the former navy lieutenant senior grade who is under military custody for his alleged role in the 2003 Oakwood mutiny. Esperon gave a clear indication of where he wants to go when he said that all the C-4 in the inventory of the Armed Forces had been properly accounted for, except for what had been recorded as “stolen” prior to the Oakwood affair.
Given the gravity of his charge, Trillanes has the duty to substantiate it, even though many people seem ready to believe, even without proof, the worst things said against the administration. But this should not happen in a close-door investigation conducted by his jailers. One way to do this is for the Senate to create an ad hoc committee for this specific purpose. This is not without precedent. In 1960 the House of Representatives named a 15-man committee to investigate charges of bribery made by then Congressman Sergio Osmena, Jr. against President Carlos P. Garcia. When Osmena failed to validate his charges, the House suspended him for 15 months.
At the same time, an independent investigation of the bombing, an idea supported by Senate Minority Leader Aquilino Pimentel, Jr., should now be carried out, with the help of well-known outside institutions like the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and Britain’s Scotland Yard. This should insulate the search for truth from those who may want to dictate or influence the conduct of the investigation or its results. The ideal setting would be a new government with completely new officials to support such an investigation.
All sorts of cockamamie theories have been advanced to explain the blast. After Gonzales and Esperon had called it a terrorist act, sources at the Philippine National Police Bomb Data Center and crime laboratory reported traces of RDX and C-4 from the scene of the blast. RDX is an explosive that works by itself or in combination with other ingredients in explosives, while C-4 is a composition that uses RDX as its base.
But where real terrorists usually claim credit for their deed at the first breaking news, it took the so-called Rajah Solaiman Group (RSG) more than 24 hours to send a text message lamely owning the crime, and demanding even more lamely the release of some imprisoned brethren, if the government did not want to see more bodies.
In the worst written film script, the terrorists would demand the release of their imprisoned brethren, as a necessary condition for them not to poison the water system, release the rockets, or blast the football stadium in the middle of a championship game. Not only is the RSG script unique, RSG itself is more mythical than real; it does not appear in any credible website monitoring terrorism. Obviously, whoever wrote the script was not much concerned with sounding credible.
After the RSG yarn failed to wash, the police dismissed earlier findings of RDX and C4, and advanced the theory that the explosion could have been triggered by fumes leaking from a diesel fuel container or methane gas from a septic tank and igniting inside the concrete basement. This is quite a jump.
If this theory is sustained, Ayala Land, Inc, which owns the mall, could end up answering charges upon charges of criminal neglect, and having to pay millions, if not billions, in indemnity claims. It could rearrange the listing of billionaires in the next issue of Forbes magazine.
No sixth sense is needed to see that the Glorietta bombing has indeed displaced the Malacanang bribery scandal from the news headlines. This need not mystify anyone; this is how the media have long behaved, here and elsewhere. But it would be wrong to believe that the bombing has taken the heat off Mrs. Arroyo for her role in the latest Malacanang bribery scandal, and that the people are ready to see her conduct the business of the presidency as usual.
A close Arroyo confidante has been heard to wonder why while all of America and most of mankind rallied behind George W. Bush after 9/11, so much distrust and outright accusation greeted Mrs. Arroyo after the Glorietta explosion. I take that as a perfectly innocent remark, not an expression of disappointment of someone who might have thought that if the Glorietta was bombed, it would unleash a tsunami of sympathy and support for Mrs. Arroyo’s continued rule.
Perhaps the explanation is really simple. Our people had already decided they have had enough of Mrs. Arroyo, and that the Glorietta bombing has merely postponed the inevitable.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
Erap may get reprieve from right reading of plunder
Very few were surprised when, after six years of trial, the Sandiganbayan found ousted President Joseph Ejercito Estrada guilty of plunder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua on September 12, 2007. Then, as now, many felt the case was primarily, if not purely, political; that there was no way to acquit Estrada without effectively finding President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo guilty of a worse crime.
Estrada and Arroyo were first elected president and vice president respectively, for a term of six years, in 1998. In 2000, Estrada was impeached by the House of Representatives and brought to the Senate for trial. But the trial ended in the streets when the prosecutors walked out, and anti-Estrada forces called for his ouster. The Armed Forces chief of staff then led a mutiny and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court swore in Mrs. Arroyo as president, without a vacancy in Malacanang. That was January 20, 2001.
Intense pressure was promptly made to bear on Estrada to resign formally and leave the country, or at least to leave the country even without writing a letter of resignation. When he refused, he was charged with plunder, arrested and jailed on April 25, 2001. He has been in detention since.
The plunder law (Republic Act 7080) was enacted in 1991. It was meant to punish, according to its authors, “not simple cases of malversation of public funds, bribery, extortion, theft and graft, but [the] plunder of an entire nation, resulting in material damage to the national economy.” Thus, “any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates, or other persons, amasses, accumulates, or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of over or criminal acts…in the aggregate amount of P50 million shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death.” The death penalty has since been stricken off our laws.
To establish the crime of plunder, it is necessary to prove beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of a conspiracy or an overall unlawful scheme.
Estrada was accused of having amassed P4,097,804,173.17 by:
(a) Receiving or collecting P545 million from illegal gambling in
connivance with Charlie ‘Atong’Ang, Jose ‘Jinggoy’ Estrada, Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Edward Serapio, and John Does and Jane Does in consideration of “toleration or protection of illegal gambling”;
(b) Diverting P130 million from the tobacco excise tax share of the
Province of Ilocos Sur in connivance with Atong Ang, Alma Alfaro, Eleuterio Tan, Delia Rajas and other John Does and Jane Does;
(c) Ordering and compelling the Government Service Insurance System
(GSIS) to purchase 351,878,000 shares of stock, and the Social Security System (SSS) 329,855,000 shares of stock of the Belle Corporation for a total of P1,847,578.50, and collecting P189,700,000 as commission from Belle;
(d) Amassing P3,233,104,173.17 from commissions, gifts, shares,
percentages, kickbacks, and depositing the same in the account of Jose Velarde at Equitable-PCIBank.
The court acquitted Estrada on (b) and (d), but found him guilty on (a)
and (c). Estrada, through counsel, moved for reconsideration. On Oct. 19, the Sandigan heard oral arguments on the motion.
It was an education in the law, particularly on plunder. Arguing for the defense, lawyers Estelito Mendoza and Rene Saguisag pointed out why Estrada could not be held for plunder.
The crime of plunder, Mendoza pointed out, quoting the law and the Senate debates during its enactment, requires an overall scheme and a conspiracy to commit a combination or series of inter-connected acts which, when executed, results not only in the unlawful accumulation of P50 million or more, but also in material damage to the economy of the nation. The prosecution failed to show this, Mendoza argued; there is, therefore, no basis for the court’s conclusion.
In the case of the jueteng money, the prosecution built its case solely on the word of former Ilocos Sur Governor Luis “Chavit” Singson. He testified that he collected money from the jueteng operators over a period of time, recorded his collections in listahans, which he described as “ledgers,” turned over the money to Estrada in exchange for his “toleration or protection” of jueteng.
Mendoza pointed out that the only crime established by Singson’s testimony was his own. For Estrada to be held liable for plunder, he should have conspired with Singson and others. But the prosecution failed to allege a conspiracy, and Singson, who has confessed to his crime, is not named as a co-conspirator. Absent such conspiracy, Singson’s crime, which the state had chosen to condone in exchange for his uncorroborated testimony, cannot be attributed to Estrada or others.
The acquittal of Erap’s son, Senator Jinggoy Estrada, and his lawyer Edward Serapio, corporate secretary of the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation, which received and retains custody of P200 million from Singson, only makes the point clear. There can be no finding of plunder.
Another co-accused Atong Ang entered into a plea bargaining agreement with the state and was convicted of the crime of corrupting public officers. This effectively erased the original charges against him, and removes him as a possible co-conspirator.
Likewise, in the SSS/GSIS purchase of the Belle shares, purchase was done by SSS Administrator Carlos Arellano and by GSIS head Ding Pascual. Again, the prosecution failed to allege a conspiracy, and neither Arellano nor Pascual was named as co-conspirator. Estrada cannot be held liable for the acts of Arellano and Pascual.
Assuming the acts alleged in (a) and (c) have been committed, they do not constitute “a combination or series” flowing from a conspiracy or an overall scheme and whose execution materially damaged the economy of the nation. The prosecution failed to allege it and there is no evidence on record to show it.
Special Prosecutor Dennis Villa-Ignacio, mild-mannered and low key, read a prepared rebuttal. But it was mute on the specific issues raised by the defense. Mendoza took this to mean the prosecution was conceding the points of the defense. But even if the prosecution does not concede, the oral arguments succeeded in raising reasonable doubt about the correctness of the court’s decision. For this reason alone, the Justices may have to reconsider.
There may be a broader and highly compelling reason. This is the first plunder trial since the law was enacted in 1991. And the accused is a former President. There may be some pressure to affirm the conviction, but the precedent the court will set could very well apply to the next outgoing President, and the next and the next. In an imperfect system where today’s prosecutors may be tomorrow’s prosecuted, the court may not want to create a precedent that would make it so easy for any administration to let the last former president spend the rest of his natural life as a convicted plunderer.
Estrada and Arroyo were first elected president and vice president respectively, for a term of six years, in 1998. In 2000, Estrada was impeached by the House of Representatives and brought to the Senate for trial. But the trial ended in the streets when the prosecutors walked out, and anti-Estrada forces called for his ouster. The Armed Forces chief of staff then led a mutiny and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court swore in Mrs. Arroyo as president, without a vacancy in Malacanang. That was January 20, 2001.
Intense pressure was promptly made to bear on Estrada to resign formally and leave the country, or at least to leave the country even without writing a letter of resignation. When he refused, he was charged with plunder, arrested and jailed on April 25, 2001. He has been in detention since.
The plunder law (Republic Act 7080) was enacted in 1991. It was meant to punish, according to its authors, “not simple cases of malversation of public funds, bribery, extortion, theft and graft, but [the] plunder of an entire nation, resulting in material damage to the national economy.” Thus, “any public officer who, by himself or in connivance with members of his family, relatives by affinity or consanguinity, business associates, subordinates, or other persons, amasses, accumulates, or acquires ill-gotten wealth through a combination or series of over or criminal acts…in the aggregate amount of P50 million shall be guilty of the crime of plunder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death.” The death penalty has since been stricken off our laws.
To establish the crime of plunder, it is necessary to prove beyond reasonable doubt a pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of a conspiracy or an overall unlawful scheme.
Estrada was accused of having amassed P4,097,804,173.17 by:
(a) Receiving or collecting P545 million from illegal gambling in
connivance with Charlie ‘Atong’Ang, Jose ‘Jinggoy’ Estrada, Yolanda T. Ricaforte, Edward Serapio, and John Does and Jane Does in consideration of “toleration or protection of illegal gambling”;
(b) Diverting P130 million from the tobacco excise tax share of the
Province of Ilocos Sur in connivance with Atong Ang, Alma Alfaro, Eleuterio Tan, Delia Rajas and other John Does and Jane Does;
(c) Ordering and compelling the Government Service Insurance System
(GSIS) to purchase 351,878,000 shares of stock, and the Social Security System (SSS) 329,855,000 shares of stock of the Belle Corporation for a total of P1,847,578.50, and collecting P189,700,000 as commission from Belle;
(d) Amassing P3,233,104,173.17 from commissions, gifts, shares,
percentages, kickbacks, and depositing the same in the account of Jose Velarde at Equitable-PCIBank.
The court acquitted Estrada on (b) and (d), but found him guilty on (a)
and (c). Estrada, through counsel, moved for reconsideration. On Oct. 19, the Sandigan heard oral arguments on the motion.
It was an education in the law, particularly on plunder. Arguing for the defense, lawyers Estelito Mendoza and Rene Saguisag pointed out why Estrada could not be held for plunder.
The crime of plunder, Mendoza pointed out, quoting the law and the Senate debates during its enactment, requires an overall scheme and a conspiracy to commit a combination or series of inter-connected acts which, when executed, results not only in the unlawful accumulation of P50 million or more, but also in material damage to the economy of the nation. The prosecution failed to show this, Mendoza argued; there is, therefore, no basis for the court’s conclusion.
In the case of the jueteng money, the prosecution built its case solely on the word of former Ilocos Sur Governor Luis “Chavit” Singson. He testified that he collected money from the jueteng operators over a period of time, recorded his collections in listahans, which he described as “ledgers,” turned over the money to Estrada in exchange for his “toleration or protection” of jueteng.
Mendoza pointed out that the only crime established by Singson’s testimony was his own. For Estrada to be held liable for plunder, he should have conspired with Singson and others. But the prosecution failed to allege a conspiracy, and Singson, who has confessed to his crime, is not named as a co-conspirator. Absent such conspiracy, Singson’s crime, which the state had chosen to condone in exchange for his uncorroborated testimony, cannot be attributed to Estrada or others.
The acquittal of Erap’s son, Senator Jinggoy Estrada, and his lawyer Edward Serapio, corporate secretary of the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation, which received and retains custody of P200 million from Singson, only makes the point clear. There can be no finding of plunder.
Another co-accused Atong Ang entered into a plea bargaining agreement with the state and was convicted of the crime of corrupting public officers. This effectively erased the original charges against him, and removes him as a possible co-conspirator.
Likewise, in the SSS/GSIS purchase of the Belle shares, purchase was done by SSS Administrator Carlos Arellano and by GSIS head Ding Pascual. Again, the prosecution failed to allege a conspiracy, and neither Arellano nor Pascual was named as co-conspirator. Estrada cannot be held liable for the acts of Arellano and Pascual.
Assuming the acts alleged in (a) and (c) have been committed, they do not constitute “a combination or series” flowing from a conspiracy or an overall scheme and whose execution materially damaged the economy of the nation. The prosecution failed to allege it and there is no evidence on record to show it.
Special Prosecutor Dennis Villa-Ignacio, mild-mannered and low key, read a prepared rebuttal. But it was mute on the specific issues raised by the defense. Mendoza took this to mean the prosecution was conceding the points of the defense. But even if the prosecution does not concede, the oral arguments succeeded in raising reasonable doubt about the correctness of the court’s decision. For this reason alone, the Justices may have to reconsider.
There may be a broader and highly compelling reason. This is the first plunder trial since the law was enacted in 1991. And the accused is a former President. There may be some pressure to affirm the conviction, but the precedent the court will set could very well apply to the next outgoing President, and the next and the next. In an imperfect system where today’s prosecutors may be tomorrow’s prosecuted, the court may not want to create a precedent that would make it so easy for any administration to let the last former president spend the rest of his natural life as a convicted plunderer.
Glorietta bombing gives Gloria no special grace
At least nine people died and 129 were wounded from the explosion that tore through the Glorietta II shopping mall in Makati on Friday afternoon. It was the first bloody incident since the renewed call for President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s resignation began to gather steam, in the wake of the bribe-giving frenzy that had sought to protect her from the fallout of the $329-million ZTE National Broadband Network bribery scandal.
The victims were all innocent shopkeepers, sales clerks, shoppers, window-shoppers and plain passers-by, typical random victims of terrorism. National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales was quick to call it that ---an “act of terrorism,” but failed to identify the suspected terrorists. And no terrorist group has since owned the crime.
Senator Antonio Trillanes, the former naval lieutenant senior grade who remains under detention for his supposed role in the 2003 Oakwood Mutiny, was as quick to denounce the bombing as the handiwork of Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, the Armed Forces Chief of Staff, and Gonzales himself, who both denied the allegation.
“Terrorist” attacks are, by definition, staged by terrorists. They normally leave their fingerprints, and announce their purpose or motive. Some incidents, however, may be manufactured and made to look like the work of terrorists, to justify an extreme response that begins with the arbitrary suppression of human rights and civil liberties. Nobody usually claims credit for these.
Criminal regimes, confronted with rising opposition and dwindling public support, are likely to resort to this tactic. The Arroyo regime will resent being so classified, but that is how many observers regard it, after having been associated with so many incidents, the latest being the bribery scandal in the highly overpriced NBN deal and the second bribery scandal in the initiation of the nuisance complaint for impeachment against Mrs. Arroyo in the House of Representatives.
The new anti-Arroyo wave began after former NEDA director-general Romulo Neri told a Senate inquiry that Benjamin Abalos, then chairman of the Commission on Elections, had offered him a P200-million bribe to approve the NBN project; that he had reported it to Mrs. Arroyo; but that she did nothing about it.
Thereafter lawyer Roberto Rafael Pulido reportedly took a fee to file a preemptive non-complaint to immunize Mrs. Arroyo from being impeached for a period of one year, under the highly questionable Supreme Court ruling on impeachment. At least 190 congressmen were later said to have received P200,000 to P500,000 each to support the transmittal of the nuisance complaint to the Committee on Justice, which is now expected to kill it.
Unfortunately, the largesse spread to the governors who had come to Malacanang that same day, and Murphy’s law intervened. (“If anything can go wrong, it will.”) The visibly incredulous priest-governor of Pampanga, a first timer in politics, picked up the P500,000 he had received inside a brown bag in awe, and showed it on television. This was a first in the history of the Palace. It instantly exposed what the president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines called the “moral bankruptcy” of the regime, and quickly revived calls for Arroyo’s resignation. The same calls had dominated the headlines after the famous “Hello, Garci” tape revealed the cheating in the 2004 presidential elections and subsided only before the campaign for the 2007 elections.
It was at this point then, when Mrs. Arroyo seemed to be ripe for the coup de grace, that the Glorietta II explosion came. It quickly threatened to divert public attention from the smoldering bribery scandal that had brought the regime so close to the edge. Panicked by scandal, Mrs. Arroyo suddenly found the opportunity to appear on tv, looking glum and angry, and condoling with the victims and their families.
She then warned “destabilizers” not to exploit the tragedy for their own ends. She sounded dead serious, but her words did not quite blunt the accusation already making the rounds that it was a “bomb me” operation, as probably indicated by the traces of C4 at the point of impact. C4 is found in the military inventory alone.
Mrs. Arroyo was right to ask the nation to unite in trying to discover and punish the perpetrators. One way to do this is to bring in independent, reputable foreign experts, who will tell us the truth, rather that somebody’s propaganda line. But it would be totally wishful if she also expected the people to unite in supporting continued immorality in government.
Not even tragedy wipes out our sins. Mrs. Arroyo cannot possibly believe, or even suggest, that the Glorietta incident had earned her a reprieve from the rising call for her resignation and that of her entire government. For if the incident was, indeed, the work of terrorists, then the first conclusion that could be drawn from it is the appalling incompetence of her government.
There was a marked failure of intelligence. The C4 obviously went past the K-9 special agent and his dog deployed at every mall entrance to smell gunpowder, C4, dangerous drugs and other substances. Are we now to grant the point of the security critics when they say that because of inept and incompetent security policies and practices these dogs are not even able to smell these dangerous substances anymore?
How then can we depend upon the regime to ensure the physical security and safety of our people? Should the regime be given special grace for its demonstrated ineptitude and incompetence? Indeed, the bombing should unite us not only in grief but also in condemning the savagery of the unknown perpetrators. But what happens if it is ultimately shown that the “act of terrorism”, which we all condemn, was, in fact, as Trillanes and others suggest, an illegal military or police operation?
We should mourn the dead, show our compassion for the wounded, and do everything to make sure that the Glorietta incident does not ever happen again. But we should allow no one and no incident to deter us from insisting on having a government grounded on the truth, justice, and good rather than on falsehood, injustice and evil, and that will never exploit any human tragedy to prolong an immoral rule.
The victims were all innocent shopkeepers, sales clerks, shoppers, window-shoppers and plain passers-by, typical random victims of terrorism. National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales was quick to call it that ---an “act of terrorism,” but failed to identify the suspected terrorists. And no terrorist group has since owned the crime.
Senator Antonio Trillanes, the former naval lieutenant senior grade who remains under detention for his supposed role in the 2003 Oakwood Mutiny, was as quick to denounce the bombing as the handiwork of Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, the Armed Forces Chief of Staff, and Gonzales himself, who both denied the allegation.
“Terrorist” attacks are, by definition, staged by terrorists. They normally leave their fingerprints, and announce their purpose or motive. Some incidents, however, may be manufactured and made to look like the work of terrorists, to justify an extreme response that begins with the arbitrary suppression of human rights and civil liberties. Nobody usually claims credit for these.
Criminal regimes, confronted with rising opposition and dwindling public support, are likely to resort to this tactic. The Arroyo regime will resent being so classified, but that is how many observers regard it, after having been associated with so many incidents, the latest being the bribery scandal in the highly overpriced NBN deal and the second bribery scandal in the initiation of the nuisance complaint for impeachment against Mrs. Arroyo in the House of Representatives.
The new anti-Arroyo wave began after former NEDA director-general Romulo Neri told a Senate inquiry that Benjamin Abalos, then chairman of the Commission on Elections, had offered him a P200-million bribe to approve the NBN project; that he had reported it to Mrs. Arroyo; but that she did nothing about it.
Thereafter lawyer Roberto Rafael Pulido reportedly took a fee to file a preemptive non-complaint to immunize Mrs. Arroyo from being impeached for a period of one year, under the highly questionable Supreme Court ruling on impeachment. At least 190 congressmen were later said to have received P200,000 to P500,000 each to support the transmittal of the nuisance complaint to the Committee on Justice, which is now expected to kill it.
Unfortunately, the largesse spread to the governors who had come to Malacanang that same day, and Murphy’s law intervened. (“If anything can go wrong, it will.”) The visibly incredulous priest-governor of Pampanga, a first timer in politics, picked up the P500,000 he had received inside a brown bag in awe, and showed it on television. This was a first in the history of the Palace. It instantly exposed what the president of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines called the “moral bankruptcy” of the regime, and quickly revived calls for Arroyo’s resignation. The same calls had dominated the headlines after the famous “Hello, Garci” tape revealed the cheating in the 2004 presidential elections and subsided only before the campaign for the 2007 elections.
It was at this point then, when Mrs. Arroyo seemed to be ripe for the coup de grace, that the Glorietta II explosion came. It quickly threatened to divert public attention from the smoldering bribery scandal that had brought the regime so close to the edge. Panicked by scandal, Mrs. Arroyo suddenly found the opportunity to appear on tv, looking glum and angry, and condoling with the victims and their families.
She then warned “destabilizers” not to exploit the tragedy for their own ends. She sounded dead serious, but her words did not quite blunt the accusation already making the rounds that it was a “bomb me” operation, as probably indicated by the traces of C4 at the point of impact. C4 is found in the military inventory alone.
Mrs. Arroyo was right to ask the nation to unite in trying to discover and punish the perpetrators. One way to do this is to bring in independent, reputable foreign experts, who will tell us the truth, rather that somebody’s propaganda line. But it would be totally wishful if she also expected the people to unite in supporting continued immorality in government.
Not even tragedy wipes out our sins. Mrs. Arroyo cannot possibly believe, or even suggest, that the Glorietta incident had earned her a reprieve from the rising call for her resignation and that of her entire government. For if the incident was, indeed, the work of terrorists, then the first conclusion that could be drawn from it is the appalling incompetence of her government.
There was a marked failure of intelligence. The C4 obviously went past the K-9 special agent and his dog deployed at every mall entrance to smell gunpowder, C4, dangerous drugs and other substances. Are we now to grant the point of the security critics when they say that because of inept and incompetent security policies and practices these dogs are not even able to smell these dangerous substances anymore?
How then can we depend upon the regime to ensure the physical security and safety of our people? Should the regime be given special grace for its demonstrated ineptitude and incompetence? Indeed, the bombing should unite us not only in grief but also in condemning the savagery of the unknown perpetrators. But what happens if it is ultimately shown that the “act of terrorism”, which we all condemn, was, in fact, as Trillanes and others suggest, an illegal military or police operation?
We should mourn the dead, show our compassion for the wounded, and do everything to make sure that the Glorietta incident does not ever happen again. But we should allow no one and no incident to deter us from insisting on having a government grounded on the truth, justice, and good rather than on falsehood, injustice and evil, and that will never exploit any human tragedy to prolong an immoral rule.
Friday, October 19, 2007
We must now compel Arroyo to remove herself
The butchers of Burma may have made their country the most frightening in the world. But the Arroyo administration has made itself the most corrupt and morally depraved in Southeast Asia, if not in the world. Everyone else may only run for second place.
The moral decay did not begin on Oct. 5, 2007 when lawyer Roberto Rafael Pulido and Laguna Congressman Edgar San Luis initiated, reportedly for a fee, what is generally seen as a nuisance complaint for impeachment, purposely to protect rather than prosecute President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for her role in the now-cancelled, highly overpriced, bribery-ridden $329-million ZTE National Broadband Network contract.
It did not begin on Oct. 11 when 190 congressmen in the morning and more congressmen in the evening, and 48 provincial governors in-between, reportedly received brown bags containing P200,000 to P500,000 each from unnamed official functionaries in Malacanang.
It did not begin when Pampanga's priest-Governor Ed Panlilio revealed that he had received one such brown bag containing P500,000 in five bundles of P1000 bills, and showed the money to the public during a press conference.
The moral decay had long set in. It was well in progress in 2001 when Mrs. Arroyo first seized the presidency in a judicially assisted military coup, supported by probably well-meaning but myopic and misguided members of the perfumed elite.
It was in an advanced state in 2004 when Mrs. Arroyo claimed victory in the presidential elections despite evidence of massive fraud, participated in by well-positioned military and police officers named in the infamous tape-recording of her highly incriminatory conversations with former Commission on Elections Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, Jr.
The rot spread when none of the generals so named were investigated or court martialed, but were promoted instead and put on top of their far worthier and more honorable comrades. It continued to assail our senses whenever a major scandal erupted, and the questionable transaction was cleared, the palpable wrongdoer absolved, and the whistleblower ended in the soup. One could expose the ugliest details of the most sordid crime by those in power, and the only response he got was: "So what? Is there anything you can do about it?" And there seemed to be no stopping it.
Constitutional and legal shortcuts abridged human rights and civil liberties, thrashed the principle of check and balance and the separation of powers, and made certain laws subject to whimsical and wrongful modifications by the Executive. The Supreme Court justices legitimated many of these abuses; on their own, they single-handedly destroyed the constitutional law on impeachment.
No public distinction seemed to exist anymore between truth and falsehood, between right and wrong, between good and evil. The strength of the law has been replaced with the law of the strong – the law of those in charge. And the only distinction that seemed to matter to them was between "we" and "you" ----"we are in power, and you are not."
After years of seeing their civil and political rights violently suppressed, many had come to believe it no longer made sense to protest against the criminal syndicate that has replaced government. All the syndicate had to do was to buy those who could be bought, and arrest, intimidate and physically silence by temporary or permanent means those who could not be bought.
It took the priest-Governor of Pampanga brandishing that venal bundle of cash on television, and Mrs. Arroyo maintaining a Sphinx-like silence for days while the headlines screamed rape for the people finally to see that official corruption and depravity had gone too far ---far beyond what they were prepared to tolerate.
No one is naïve enough to believe this was the first time money of this kind was ever distributed inside the Palace. The last two failed impeachment attempts against Mrs. Arroyo had been marked with similar stories about congressmen being bought by the Palace. But not a single courtesan squealed.
This was the first time physical evidence of political loot ever made the prime time tv newscast, courtesy of a political novice who was not suffering from a severe surplus of funds nor nursing a political grudge against Malacanang. But while all of Mrs. Arroyo's men with an IQ below room temperature were trying to explain the unexplainable, Mrs. Arroyo kept herself scarce, as though nothing had happened, nothing was happening, and nothing could ever happen to disturb her peace.
That tv footage, played and replayed over and over again, could yet do to Mrs. Arroyo what that famous photo of a Vietnamese officer about to empty his handgun on the head of a kneeling Vietcong man did to the United States and its allies in Vietnam during the war.
Had this incident happened in Japan, where we recently saw a spate of Cabinet resignations, Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government would have immediately resigned, with a profuse apology to the Filipino people. If she was impelled by a greater sense of honor and duty to the people, she might have committed sepuko and disemboweled herself within hours. Instead, she went missing from the scene for seven days and tried to distract herself and the nation from the burning issue of the day. Only then did she finally say the "cash gift" should be investigated.
Some senators also want it investigated. But it is no longer the season for such kneejerk. Almost everything in this country has been investigated; we are suffering from a surfeit of probes without purpose and without result. We must now compel Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government to act. They must learn from the Japanese and other civilized races and remove themselves from the scene, while it is yet possible to do so with some dignity and grace.
Otherwise, we must now do our duty and claim our rights, reclaim our country from the deep abyss where gross immorality has grounded it. This is no longer the time for anyone of us to be sending frivolous or insulting text messages as a way to get even with the object of our outrage. This is the time to be angry, as Jesus before the money-changers in the Temple got angry, yet to decide calmly and soberly that we will confront the evil and end it, whatever the cost or consequence. This has to be the point of no return. There should be no turning back.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
WE MUST NOW COMPEL ARROYO TO REMOVE HERSELF
The butchers of Burma may have made their country the most frightening in the world. But the Arroyo administration has made itself the most corrupt and morally depraved in Southeast Asia, if not in the world. Everyone else may only run for second place.
The moral decay did not begin on Oct. 5, 2007 when lawyer Roberto Rafael Pulido and Laguna Congressman Edgar San Luis initiated, reportedly for a fee, what is generally seen as a nuisance complaint for impeachment, purposely to protect rather than prosecute President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for her role in the now-cancelled, highly overpriced, bribery-ridden $329-million ZTE National Broadband Network contract.
It did not begin on Oct. 11 when 190 congressmen in the morning and more congressmen in the evening, and 48 provincial governors in-between, reportedly received brown bags containing P200,000 to P500,000 each from unnamed official functionaries in Malacanang.
It did not begin when Pampanga’s priest-Governor Ed Panlilio revealed that he had received one such brown bag containing P500,000 in five bundles of P1000 bills, and showed the money to the public during a press conference.
The moral decay had long set in. It was well in progress in 2001 when Mrs. Arroyo first seized the presidency in a judicially assisted military coup, supported by probably well-meaning but myopic and misguided members of the perfumed elite.
It was in an advanced state in 2004 when Mrs. Arroyo claimed victory in the presidential elections despite evidence of massive fraud, participated in by well-positioned military and police officers named in the infamous tape-recording of her highly incriminatory conversations with former Commission on Elections Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, Jr.
The rot spread when none of the generals so named were investigated or court martialed, but were promoted instead and put on top of their far worthier and more honorable comrades. It continued to assail our senses whenever a major scandal erupted, and the questionable transaction was cleared, the palpable wrongdoer absolved, and the whistleblower ended in the soup. One could expose the ugliest details of the most sordid crime by those in power, and the only response he got was: “So what? Is there anything you can do about it?” And there seemed to be no stopping it.
Constitutional and legal shortcuts abridged human rights and civil liberties, thrashed the principle of check and balance and the separation of powers, and made certain laws subject to whimsical and wrongful modifications by the Executive. The Supreme Court justices legitimated many of these abuses; on their own, they single-handedly destroyed the constitutional law on impeachment.
No public distinction seemed to exist anymore between truth and falsehood, between right and wrong, between good and evil. The strength of the law has been replaced with the law of the strong – the law of those in charge. And the only distinction that seemed to matter to them was between “we” and “you” ----“we are in power, and you are not.”
After years of seeing their civil and political rights violently suppressed, many had come to believe it no longer made sense to protest against the criminal syndicate that has replaced government. All the syndicate had to do was to buy those who could be bought, and arrest, intimidate and physically silence by temporary or permanent means those who could not be bought.
It took the priest-Governor of Pampanga brandishing that venal bundle of cash on television, and Mrs. Arroyo maintaining a Sphinx-like silence for days while the headlines screamed rape for the people finally to see that official corruption and depravity had gone too far ---far beyond what they were prepared to tolerate.
No one is naïve enough to believe this was the first time money of this kind was ever distributed inside the Palace. The last two failed impeachment attempts against Mrs. Arroyo had been marked with similar stories about congressmen being bought by the Palace. But not a single courtesan squealed.
This was the first time physical evidence of political loot ever made the prime time TV newscast, courtesy of a political novice who was not suffering from a severe surplus of funds nor nursing a political grudge against Malacanang. But while all of Mrs. Arroyo’s men with an IQ below room temperature were trying to explain the unexplainable, Mrs. Arroyo kept herself scarce, as though nothing had happened, nothing was happening, and nothing could ever happen to disturb her peace.
That TV footage, played and replayed over and over again, could yet do to Mrs. Arroyo what that famous photo of a Vietnamese officer about to empty his handgun on the head of a kneeling Vietcong man did to the United States and its allies in Vietnam during the war.
Had this incident happened in Japan, where we recently saw a spate of Cabinet resignations, Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government would have immediately resigned, with a profuse apology to the Filipino people. If she was impelled by a greater sense of honor and duty to the people, she might have committed sepuko and disemboweled herself within hours. Instead, she went missing from the scene for seven days and tried to distract herself and the nation from the burning issue of the day. Only then did she finally say the “cash gift” should be investigated.
Some senators also want it investigated. But it is no longer the season for such kneejerk. Almost everything in this country has been investigated; we are suffering from a surfeit of probes without purpose and without result. We must now compel Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government to act. They must learn from the Japanese and other civilized races and remove themselves from the scene, while it is yet possible to do so with some dignity and grace.
Otherwise, we must now do our duty and claim our rights, reclaim our country from the deep abyss where gross immorality has grounded it. This is no longer the time for anyone of us to be sending frivolous or insulting text messages as a way to get even with the object of our outrage. This is the time to be angry, as Jesus before the money-changers in the Temple got angry, yet to decide calmly and soberly that we will confront the evil and end it, whatever the cost or consequence. This has to be the point of no return. There should be no turning back.
The moral decay did not begin on Oct. 5, 2007 when lawyer Roberto Rafael Pulido and Laguna Congressman Edgar San Luis initiated, reportedly for a fee, what is generally seen as a nuisance complaint for impeachment, purposely to protect rather than prosecute President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo for her role in the now-cancelled, highly overpriced, bribery-ridden $329-million ZTE National Broadband Network contract.
It did not begin on Oct. 11 when 190 congressmen in the morning and more congressmen in the evening, and 48 provincial governors in-between, reportedly received brown bags containing P200,000 to P500,000 each from unnamed official functionaries in Malacanang.
It did not begin when Pampanga’s priest-Governor Ed Panlilio revealed that he had received one such brown bag containing P500,000 in five bundles of P1000 bills, and showed the money to the public during a press conference.
The moral decay had long set in. It was well in progress in 2001 when Mrs. Arroyo first seized the presidency in a judicially assisted military coup, supported by probably well-meaning but myopic and misguided members of the perfumed elite.
It was in an advanced state in 2004 when Mrs. Arroyo claimed victory in the presidential elections despite evidence of massive fraud, participated in by well-positioned military and police officers named in the infamous tape-recording of her highly incriminatory conversations with former Commission on Elections Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano, Jr.
The rot spread when none of the generals so named were investigated or court martialed, but were promoted instead and put on top of their far worthier and more honorable comrades. It continued to assail our senses whenever a major scandal erupted, and the questionable transaction was cleared, the palpable wrongdoer absolved, and the whistleblower ended in the soup. One could expose the ugliest details of the most sordid crime by those in power, and the only response he got was: “So what? Is there anything you can do about it?” And there seemed to be no stopping it.
Constitutional and legal shortcuts abridged human rights and civil liberties, thrashed the principle of check and balance and the separation of powers, and made certain laws subject to whimsical and wrongful modifications by the Executive. The Supreme Court justices legitimated many of these abuses; on their own, they single-handedly destroyed the constitutional law on impeachment.
No public distinction seemed to exist anymore between truth and falsehood, between right and wrong, between good and evil. The strength of the law has been replaced with the law of the strong – the law of those in charge. And the only distinction that seemed to matter to them was between “we” and “you” ----“we are in power, and you are not.”
After years of seeing their civil and political rights violently suppressed, many had come to believe it no longer made sense to protest against the criminal syndicate that has replaced government. All the syndicate had to do was to buy those who could be bought, and arrest, intimidate and physically silence by temporary or permanent means those who could not be bought.
It took the priest-Governor of Pampanga brandishing that venal bundle of cash on television, and Mrs. Arroyo maintaining a Sphinx-like silence for days while the headlines screamed rape for the people finally to see that official corruption and depravity had gone too far ---far beyond what they were prepared to tolerate.
No one is naïve enough to believe this was the first time money of this kind was ever distributed inside the Palace. The last two failed impeachment attempts against Mrs. Arroyo had been marked with similar stories about congressmen being bought by the Palace. But not a single courtesan squealed.
This was the first time physical evidence of political loot ever made the prime time TV newscast, courtesy of a political novice who was not suffering from a severe surplus of funds nor nursing a political grudge against Malacanang. But while all of Mrs. Arroyo’s men with an IQ below room temperature were trying to explain the unexplainable, Mrs. Arroyo kept herself scarce, as though nothing had happened, nothing was happening, and nothing could ever happen to disturb her peace.
That TV footage, played and replayed over and over again, could yet do to Mrs. Arroyo what that famous photo of a Vietnamese officer about to empty his handgun on the head of a kneeling Vietcong man did to the United States and its allies in Vietnam during the war.
Had this incident happened in Japan, where we recently saw a spate of Cabinet resignations, Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government would have immediately resigned, with a profuse apology to the Filipino people. If she was impelled by a greater sense of honor and duty to the people, she might have committed sepuko and disemboweled herself within hours. Instead, she went missing from the scene for seven days and tried to distract herself and the nation from the burning issue of the day. Only then did she finally say the “cash gift” should be investigated.
Some senators also want it investigated. But it is no longer the season for such kneejerk. Almost everything in this country has been investigated; we are suffering from a surfeit of probes without purpose and without result. We must now compel Mrs. Arroyo and her entire government to act. They must learn from the Japanese and other civilized races and remove themselves from the scene, while it is yet possible to do so with some dignity and grace.
Otherwise, we must now do our duty and claim our rights, reclaim our country from the deep abyss where gross immorality has grounded it. This is no longer the time for anyone of us to be sending frivolous or insulting text messages as a way to get even with the object of our outrage. This is the time to be angry, as Jesus before the money-changers in the Temple got angry, yet to decide calmly and soberly that we will confront the evil and end it, whatever the cost or consequence. This has to be the point of no return. There should be no turning back.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
How long before all hell breaks loose?
We are at the lowest point of our political life as a nation.
Fearing the worst fallout from the $329-million NBN-ZTE broadband scandal -- where she confirms having been told of then-Commission on Election chair Benjamin Abalos’s offer of a P200-million bribe to then NEDA chief Romulo Neri to facilitate the project, but did nothing to prosecute or punish Abalos -- President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has compelled the House of Representatives to receive a bogus impeachment complaint which is intended to prevent the filing of an honest-to-goodness impeachment complaint against her for at least one year.
Amid reports that the congressman who had endorsed the questionable complaint had been paid to do so, and that other congressmen were being offered P2 million each to do the same, Speaker Jose de Venecia had decided to freeze the transmittal of the complaint to the House Committee on Justice. But when Mrs. Arroyo threatened a showdown with De Venecia, whose son had blown the whistle on the bribe offers and kickbacks after losing his bid for the fat contract, the Speaker backed down, and allowed Deputy Speaker Raul del Mar of
The Committee on Justice is now expected to throw out the complaint for being insufficient either in form or in substance. Thereafter, no impeachment complaint may be filed against Mrs. Arroyo for at least one year, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s 2003 ruling on the law on impeachment.
Under the Constitution, the House shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment. And the Senate, the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. As written in the law, the House initiates a case of impeachment when -- and only when --- it sends to the Senate the Articles of Impeachment against an impeached official. Unless and until that happens, there is no impeachment case and no impeachment proceedings initiated exclusively by the House. There is a nonbiodegradable legal distinction between a complaint filed by one or several complainants, and a case initiated exclusively by the House.
The language of the Constitution is clear. You don’t need a lawyer or a Supreme Court justice to interpret it. But in 2003, then Chief Justice Hilario Davide, Jr., who now serves illegally as the Permanent Representative to the United Nations, in violation of the Foreign Service Act, and without having been confirmed by the Commission on Appointments, faced certain impeachment for his alleged misuse of the Judicial Development Fund. In order to save him, his colleagues ruled in Francisco vs. House of Representatives, 415 SCRA 44, that since a previous complaint against him had failed to prosper, he could no longer be subjected to an impeachment complaint that same year. That ruling saved Davide, but it completely destroyed and made a mockery of the law on impeachment.
The original sin, therefore, lies not with lawyer Oliver Lozano, who filed the first two ludicrous impeachment complaints against Mrs. Arroyo, or with Roel Pulido, who filed the present complaint. Nor with the first congressman who was reportedly paid to endorse Pulido’s complaint. Nor with the 190 others who were reportedly “fixed” to junk it. It lies with the honorable justices of the Supreme Court.
Although the Supreme Court is trying very hard to look good these days by taking initiatives that properly belong to the Executive, it has constitutionalized patently unconstitutional acts of the Arroyo administration, and allowed Mrs. Arroyo and her minions to make a mockery of the law on impeachment, prohibit Cabinet members from appearing before Congress without the President’s prior consent, and require those who appear there to deny Congress rightful access to executive information and data by invoking “executive privilege.” These court decisions have made Mrs. Arroyo a law unto herself.
Under the Constitution, a Cabinet member needs the President’s consent only when he volunteers to appear before Congress, not when he is summoned by its Members. But Executive Order 464 requires the President’s consent for all Cabinet appearances, and the Supreme Court has validated this unauthorized and invalid revision of the Constitution. The Court has also legitimated “executive privilege” to deprive Congress of its rightful access to necessary information from the Executive.
The term “executive privilege” does not appear in the Constitution at all. What the Constitution says is that whenever a Cabinet member appears on his own initiative before Congress, or upon invitation by its members, when “the security of the state or the public interest so requires, and the President so states in writing, the appearance shall be conducted in executive session.” This means the public may not share any state secrets, but the Constitution never contemplated withholding any secrets from Congress, which alone has the power to levy taxes, appropriate public funds, and declare the existence of a state of war --- vital powers denied to the President.
In the Senate hearing on the NBN-ZTE deal, Neri invoked “executive privilege” to avoid giving further information, after saying that he had informed Mrs. Arroyo of Abalos’s P200 -million bribe offer to him in exchange for his approval of the project---a detail which Mrs. Arroyo later confirmed. Neri would probably not have done so, had the senators only asked him the right questions. But instead of asking him specific questions about his talk with Mrs. Arroyo, they chose to ask him an inept blanket question----“what else did you talk about?” You ask a silly question, you get a silly answer.
The senators then decided to go into executive session. But once they were closeted inside, Budget Secretary Rolando Andaya, Jr. walked in and presented himself as Neri’s counsel. Neri was entitled to a counsel of his choice, but Andaya is a Cabinet member, prohibited by the Constitution from practicing his legal profession. He was a “stranger” there, but the senators could not even evict him from their meeting.
Since then, the new NEDA head has also invoked “executive privilege” to hold on to minutes of the NEDA meetings on the NBN-ZTE project, which are not even secret documents. Some senators have threatened to hold him in contempt, but the senators have not lately been able to enforce their own rights, nor follow their own Rules.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Citizens vs. Corruption Task Force Press Statement on Abalos Resignation
Abalos resignation bogus, House urged to push impeach bid
Former Senator Francisco S. Tatad today said there appears to be no record of Chairman Benjamin Abalos of the Commission on Elections having submitted a formal written of resignation to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and of her having accepted such resignation, thereby rendering questionable the veracity of his announced resignation.
"The published statement attributed to Presidential Legal Counsel Sergio Apostol saying that Abalos will be on terminal leave until his compulsory retirement on February 8, 2008 confirms the fact that Abalos has not resigned, and that there is no factual or legal basis for the House of Representatives to abandon the impeachment complaint against the Comelec chief. Unless and until he resigns formally and that resignation is accepted by the appointing authority, he remains an impeachable officer, and the interested parties have every reason to proceed with their impeachment complaint against Abalos," said Tatad, who chairs the Philippine Democratic Caucus and the Citizens vs. Corruption Task Force.
"The theory of constructive resignation, which the Supreme Court invented to justify the ouster of President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in 2001, does not and cannot possibly apply to Abalos. He has to submit a formal letter of resignation, and President Arroyo must accept it in order for the same to become effective, and place him beyond the reach of the impeachment process. Otherwise, the announced resignation, which Malacanang wants now to translate into a mere terminal leave of absence, is completely bogus, and he would have succeeded in playing the entire nation for fools," Tatad said.
Former Senator Francisco S. Tatad today said there appears to be no record of Chairman Benjamin Abalos of the Commission on Elections having submitted a formal written of resignation to President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo and of her having accepted such resignation, thereby rendering questionable the veracity of his announced resignation.
"The published statement attributed to Presidential Legal Counsel Sergio Apostol saying that Abalos will be on terminal leave until his compulsory retirement on February 8, 2008 confirms the fact that Abalos has not resigned, and that there is no factual or legal basis for the House of Representatives to abandon the impeachment complaint against the Comelec chief. Unless and until he resigns formally and that resignation is accepted by the appointing authority, he remains an impeachable officer, and the interested parties have every reason to proceed with their impeachment complaint against Abalos," said Tatad, who chairs the Philippine Democratic Caucus and the Citizens vs. Corruption Task Force.
"The theory of constructive resignation, which the Supreme Court invented to justify the ouster of President Joseph Ejercito Estrada in 2001, does not and cannot possibly apply to Abalos. He has to submit a formal letter of resignation, and President Arroyo must accept it in order for the same to become effective, and place him beyond the reach of the impeachment process. Otherwise, the announced resignation, which Malacanang wants now to translate into a mere terminal leave of absence, is completely bogus, and he would have succeeded in playing the entire nation for fools," Tatad said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)