ESPERON’S LEGACY

The dictionary defines “legacy” as something that is handed down or something that remains from a previous generation or time. But General Hermogenes Esperon, Chief of Staff, retires today leaving behind a legacy of controversies that has transformed the AFP from being the protector of the people to being the protector of Gloria Arroyo. 

In 2004, if I remember it right, he was among those mentioned in the “Hello Garci” tapes, as one of four generals who allegedly facilitated the rigging of the results of the elections to favor President Arroyo.  He showed his loyalty when he refused to join Brig. Gen. Danny Lim and company in the February 2006 plot to withdraw support to the present administration.  This unwavering loyalty later earned him the highest post in the AFP heirarchy, second only to the Commander-in-Chief. 

The AFP under Esperon boasts that it has reduced the CPP-NPA into a negligible force.  This claim is self-serving to say the least, as it is quite impossible to actually verify on the ground whether such report is true.  What the AFP has accomplished so far was point its guns to people perceived to be supportive of the Left, resulting in the extra-legal killings of almost a thousand activists and human rights advocates. 

Esperon’s legacy?  The 28 detained officers led by Former Marine Commandant Maj. Gen. Renato Miranda hit the nail right on its head with this statement: 

“Mister Esperon likes to fashion himself as the great “stabilizer.” He claims this to be his biggest accomplishment and legacy. But he conveniently forgets that the very cause of destabilization is he, himself. Before he points an accusing finger at anybody else, Mister Esperon should be made to realize that by prostituting the AFP, that by engaging in partisan politics and that by his canine subservience to a criminal gang, he had single-handedly fanned the flames of dissent.” 

A politicized and divided armed forces.  That is his legacy. 

On a related note, see how the Arroyo-Esperon tandem plays “god” to the confused 9 Magdalo junior officers.

Ermita appeals to the youth not to turn a blind eye on the many good things the gov’t has done.

Nope, this is not a headline from the Inquirer nor from any leading TV station or media organization.  I read it from the Philippine government website as one of its banner stories.  The headline suddenly caused shivers down my spine.  How in the world was Ermita able to arrive at the conclusion that this government has done many good things to the Filipino people?  Of course, this is understandable, coming from an Executive Secretary no less.  But how was he able to muster enough nerve to say it to the youth, particularly to the PUP graduates?  When lies are repeated over and over again for a long period of time, they become gospel truth to the person who utters them.  This, I think, may be the reason why Ermita has mouthed words that are plainly opposite to the real state of the nation. 

Ermita said:  “Whatever has been said by those who oppose it, we have a government and a leader in President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo who tries everything that she can to make a better life for our people.” 

Come again, Mr. ES?  On the contrary, the past seven years under President Arroyo has been one HELL of a ride.  If I were to rate Arroyo’s performance on a scale of 0 to 10 (with 0 as the lowest and 10 as the highest), the result is quite obvious:   

JUSTICE and HUMAN RIGHTS — ZERO.  Where is Jonas Burgos?

FOOD and AGRICULTURE — ZERO.  More rice please.

ENVIRONMENT and NATURAL RESOURCES — ZERO.  ECCs for sale?

LABOR and SOCIAL WELFARE — ZERO.  Prices are up.  Wages remain the same.

ENERGY and ECONOMY — ZERO.  Thanks to our OFWs.  The have kept the sinking boat afloat. 

EDUCATION and MORALITY — ZERO.  Lying, cheating and stealing.  These have become normal practices for people in government. 

As if praising his boss was not enough, the former military man sounded like an economist when he said:  “Barring all the unforeseen, we intend to keep our sights on a similar surge in our gross domestic product (GDP) which grew by 7.3 percent last year, exceeding all market expectations and the strongest growth registered since 1976, after 31 years.” 

Granting for the sake of argument that our economy is on the upswing, the same has not trickled down to benefit the common man.  The poor are getting poorer while the rich are getting richer.  People lining up by the hundreds to avail of cheaper rice should be a cause for embarrassment to a President who boasts of economics as her field of expertise. 

Nothing will happen to this country so long as there are leaders who continue to enrich themselves at the people’s expense.  And to all those who continue to support this bogus and corrupt administration, you deserve the kind of government you have.

STATE OF DENIAL AND MORAL BANKRUPTCY

 

For a government that owes its survival to bribery, lies, spins and cover-ups, it’s practically normal for Gloria and her cohorts to issue statements of denial to project an image of stability.  Take for example the botched kidnapping of Jun Lozada.  The explanations given by the government officials involved — from Lito Atienza to Manny Gaite — have so far bordered on either stupidity or plain absurdity, making them look like amateur liars on national television.  Their assertion that they merely provided security to Jun lozada the moment he arrived from Hongkong is simply illogical as the circumstances indicate that there really was an attempt to prevent the probinsyanong intsik from testifying at the Senate. 

But why do these people continue to lie through their teeth and defend the indefensible?  What values do they want to impart to their children and grandchildren who will sooner or later bear the brunt of their indiscretions?  Is the love for money and lust for power too important to let go that they would rather swallow their honor and reputation come hell or high water?

The interfaith rally at Makati City last Friday just showed how enraged the people have become at the scandals involving this administration.  Unlike previous rallies where only red-waving flags and anti-imperialist slogans dominate the scene, this time legitimate businessmen, students and members of the middle class took the time to go outside their comfort zones to air their indignation at the immoderate greed Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo has subjected herself into.  And despite pronouncements by Malacañang quack.. este spin doctor Anthony Golez that the thousands who attended the rally do not represent the sentiment of the majority, the latest Pulse Asia survey, at least insofar as NCR is concerned, proves otherwise. 

The mayors and governors who troop to the palace everytime Gloria Arroyo feels besieged by protest actions are not really there to show their unequivocal support for her presidency.  Actually, they are auditioning to become actors and actresses for sequestered TV stations (NBN, IBC and RPN) that have embarked on a grand plan to challenge ABS-CBN and GMA 7 in the ratings game.  The stars of both the Kapamilya and Kapuso networks have every reason to be insecure.  I heard the pay is good.  500T pesos per appearance. 

Morally bankrupt.  Corrupt.  Illegitimate.  That’s what this administration is all about.

GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO MUST RESIGN OR BE OUSTED

I’ve practically stated the reasons why Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo continues to remain in office despite mounting calls for her resignation.  The web of lies that President Arroyo and her lackeys continue to spin on the people is simply revolting, considering that the government officials involved in the ZTE scandal have practically gambled their reputation and honor just to save her skin. 

With all the scandals hounding her administration, will she resign?  Judging from her actions, the answer is no.

Should she be ousted from power?  Yes, but as to the means of doing so, the 1987 Constitution provides for only two ways by which she can be legally removed and they are: 

1.  UNDER ARTICLE 7, SECTION 11 (2nd, 3rd and 4th paragraphs): 

Whenever a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall immediately assume the powers and duties of the office as Acting President. 

Thereafter, when the President transmits to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives his written declaration that no inability exists, he shall reassume the powers and duties of his office. Meanwhile, should a majority of all the Members of the Cabinet transmit within five days to the President of the Senate and to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, their written declaration that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Congress shall decide the issue. For that purpose, the Congress shall convene, if it is not in session, within forty-eight hours, in accordance with its rules and without need of call. 

If the Congress, within ten days after receipt of the last written declaration, or, if not in session, within twelve days after it is required to assemble, determines by a two-thirds vote of both Houses, voting separately, that the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office, the Vice-President shall act as President; otherwise, the President shall continue exercising the powers and duties of his office.  

2. UNDER ARTICLE 11, SECTIONS 2 AND 3: 

Section 2. The President, the Vice-President, the Members of the Supreme Court, the Members of the Constitutional Commissions, and the Ombudsman may be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, culpable violation of the Constitution, treason, bribery, graft and corruption, other high crimes, or betrayal of public trust. All other public officers and employees may be removed from office as provided by law, but not by impeachment. 

Section 3. (1) The House of Representatives shall have the exclusive power to initiate all cases of impeachment. 

(2) A verified complaint for impeachment may be filed by any Member of the House of Representatives or by any citizen upon a resolution or endorsement by any Member thereof, which shall be included in the Order of Business within ten session days, and referred to the proper Committee within three session days thereafter. The Committee, after hearing, and by a majority vote of all its Members, shall submit its report to the House within sixty session days from such referral, together with the corresponding resolution. The resolution shall be calendared for consideration by the House within ten session days from receipt thereof. 

(3) A vote of at least one-third of all the Members of the House shall be necessary either to affirm a favorable resolution with the Articles of Impeachment of the Committee, or override its contrary resolution. The vote of each Member shall be recorded. 

(4) In case the verified complaint or resolution of impeachment is filed by at least one-third of all the Members of the House, the same shall constitute the Articles of Impeachment, and trial by the Senate shall forthwith proceed. 

(5) No impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within a period of one year. 

(6) The Senate shall have the sole power to try and decide all cases of impeachment. When sitting for that purpose, the Senators shall be on oath or affirmation. When the President of the Philippines is on trial, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court shall preside, but shall not vote. No person shall be convicted without the concurrence of two-thirds of all the Members of the Senate. 

(7) Judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than removal from office and disqualification to hold any office under the Republic of the Philippines, but the party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to prosecution, trial, and punishment, according to law. 

( The Congress shall promulgate its rules on impeachment to effectively carry out the purpose of this section.

Under the first scenario, the written declaration of a majority of all the members of the cabinet that President Arroyo is no longer able to discharge the duties and powers of the presidency is all that is needed to temporarily or even permanently remove her from office.  However, in the event that President Arroyo asserts that no such inability exists, then Congress shall eventually decide the issue by a vote of two-thirds of both Houses, voting separately. 

The second scenario is through the more popular mode of impeachment. 

From all indications, it seems that neither the first nor the second mode is possible since we all know that the House of Representatives is, in the words of Romulo Neri himself, “in the President’s pocket”. 

The other option is through the direct action of the people (people power) which is an extra-constitutional means of removing a corrupt and immoral government.  An extra-constitutional action by the way does not automatically mean that it is unconstitutional.  It just signifies that there is another way outside the ambit of the Constitution which the people can resort to the moment the institutions that are in place for holding public officers answerable are no longer effective in exacting accountability.  Let me stress that coup d’ etat is never an option because it signifies military intervention which I am not inclined to support.  The dilemma, however, is that for people power to succeed, it needs some sort of a military component like what happened in both EDSA 1 and 2.  And the military under Gen. Esperon is not about to give up on the President. 

Under the circumstances therefore, are we left with no choice but to wait and see until the power players do something to break the political impasse?  The least we can do as ordinary citizens is to continue expressing our disgust for the moral bankruptcy this government has led us into.     

-oOo-

I heard a while ago the testimony of Deputy Executive Secretary Manny Gaite before the Senate and I was shocked at his explanation on the source of the 500 thousand pesos he gave to Jun Lozada’s brother.  He basically said that he loaned the money from his rich uncle for the renovation of his parents-in-law’s house.  But that out of pity for Jun Lozada whom he admitted to have met only once or twice and who texted him that he (Lozada) was running out of funds, he went out of his way to help a man in distress without the knowledge of his wife and close relatives.

This is another vicious lie which is contrary to human experience.  If his story is to be believed, then it would seem unusual that a deputy executive secretary who receives a salary of only 35 to 40 thousand pesos a month would hand out such a large sum of money to man he hardly knew except for the fact that Lozada was in Hongkong to evade the processes of the Senate. 

When asked to explain why he gave 500 thousand pesos even if Jun Lozada did not specify an amount, the poor Gaite was at a loss for words.  He could not give a rational explanation for his action saying he was, at that time, merely motivated by his faith and conscience in helping a person like Jun Lozada. 

Did the Senators believe Manny Gaite?  None of them believed his antics except Joker Arroyo who took pains to vouch for his credibility even before the start of the hearing.  What was funny was that Joker was kind of parading Gaite as a man of conscience and integrity, telling everybody that Gaite has a nun for a sister and a priest for a brother.  But Senator Pimentel quickly made a rejoinder, arguing that just because Gaite comes from a so-called religious family is no guarantee that he would be telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth on the controversy.

Will this latest scandal finally arouse the people to take matters into their hands, that is, by staging another people power?  We’ll see in the coming days.

STARTING THEM EARLY

 

  

My one year and six-month old daughter definitely has no idea what the words mean or how significant they have become in the light of Jun Lozada’s revelations.  But when she comes of age, may these pictures remind her that her papa took a stand and chose not to be a fence sitter during one of the dark moments of the nation’s history. 

Yes, the truth shall set us free.  And as to when it shall set us free rests entirely on our sovereign right to hold accountable those who misuse and abuse the authority given them. 

Frederick Douglass once said that the limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.  Do you really believe that Gloria Arroyo will step down when her supposed term expires in 2010?  With scandal after scandal hounding her administration, I can only imagine the numerous criminal lawsuits waiting in line at the Office of the Ombudsman.  It’s therefore a no-brainer that she will do whatever she can to stay in power beyond 2010. 

The time to act is now.  Never mind the Bishops.  We can certainly discern right from wrong without their guidance.  They can drown themselves with all the monetary donations from Malacañang.

INSULTING OUR INTELLIGENCE

 

It is clear enough that Jun Lozada was held against his will by Gloria Arroyo’s henchmen.  But Avelino Razon, Lito Atienza, Mike Defensor, Alfonso Cusi and company continue to say that Lozada himself requested for security in the wake of his arrival at the NAIA.

It is clear enough that Jun Lozada was intimidated into signing an affidavit for the benefit of Malacañang.  But soon-to-be disbarred bright boy lawyer Bautista insists that he was merely there to “assist” the poor guy formulate his statements.

It is clear enough that Jun Lozada’s testimony at the Senate on the ZTE-NBN controversy revealed how well-entrenched the system of “kickbacks” has become under this bogus administration.  But Gloria Arroyo still has the audacity to say that she is doing something in the fight against graft and corruption. 

It is clear enough that JDV3, Romy Neri and Jun Lozada positively identified Benjamin Abalos as the one who brokered the deal with ZTE for a “commission” of $130M .  But the former Comelec Chair, aside from threatening to file libel charges against Lozada, continues to deny that he had a hand in the aborted anomalous transaction. 

It is clear enough that the problem is one of rampant corruption in the corridors of power.  But Gloria Arroyo and her supporters continue to insinuate, for lack of a better defense, that some Senators merely want to gain publicity and destabilize the government in the process. 

It is clear enough that there really was no assasination plot on the woman everybody loves to hate.  But Gloria’s bodyguards insist that there indeed was an attempt on her life based on a document, allegedly written in Arabic, found by a security guard in a parked car.

It is clear enough that the issue is one of truth and accountability.  But Gloria Arroyo and her morally bankrupt cabal continue to insult our intelligence with one lie after another. 

Time for communal action.  But not the CBCP way. 

(photo above courtesy of indymedia.org)

HISTORY OF CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS IN THE PHILIPPINES: A ROLLER COASTER RIDE

 

A discussion of the history of civil and political rights in the Philippines cannot be made without mentioning the government under which these rights operate. Political pundits often say that Filipinos have had the rare “opportunity” of witnessing the best (or the worst) of both worlds:  377 years in a “Spanish Convent” and 48 years in “Hollywood”.  This experience, no doubt, has significantly influenced our attitude towards human rights in general and civil and political rights in particular. Thus, the development or stagnation of these rights depends to a great extent on how a government respects and observes them and how we, as a people, struggle to assert their necessity. 

During the Spanish colonial regime, our forefathers were basically denied many of the basic civil and political rights that are now enshrined under the Constitution . It was only in the late 19th century when Filipinos, led by Dr. Jose Rizal and Marcelo H. Del Pilar, started to call for greater Filipino participation in the affairs of government; freedom of speech, of the press, and of assembly; wider social and political freedoms; equality before the law; assimilation; and representation in the Spanish Cortes or Parliament. Their pleas, however, fell on deaf ears. In 1896, Andres Bonifacio, the founder of the Katipunan , launched a revolution that marked the beginning of the end of Spanish rule.

Under the Americans, most of the rights recognized by the United States were transplanted in the Philippines. But the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of De Lima v. Bidwell held that not all constitutional rights extended to areas under American control. At that time, there was a debate on how to govern these new territories in view of the silence of the United States Constitution on the matter. The 1935 Philippine Constitution adopted most of the Bill of Rights as embodied in the amendments of the United States Constitution. Article II, Section 1 (14) of the 1935 Philippine Constitution explicitly recognized the writ of habeas corpus, bringing to the Philippines the English law concept of the remedial enforcement of the right to liberty of a person.

When the Philippines gained independence in 1946, the country continued to observe the rights granted under the 1935 Constitution until President Ferdinand Marcos declared martial law on September 21, 1972, resulting in the arrest of activists and opposition leaders. Congress was abolished while media establishments were shut down to prevent critics from exposing the ills besetting the nation. It was a dark period in our history as thousands were subjected to various human rights abuses, including extra-legal killings and enforced disappearances. Press freedom and other civil liberties were arbitrarily curtailed in the guise of Marcos’ version of peace and order.

In 1986, the glory days of the dictatorship came to an abrupt end when the Edsa “People Power” Revolution forced President Marcos and his family to flee to Hawaii. A revolutionary government was then established under President Corazon C. Aquino who immediately restored democracy and created the 1986 Constitutional Commission for the purpose of drafting a new Constitution.

The 1987 Constitution, duly ratified in a plebiscite held on February 2, 1987, embodies the pronounced effort of the Commission to provide within the constitutional structure of government a remedy against the emergence of another dictator by not only providing checks and balances within the three co-equal branches of government but also by providing for other legal means for the protection of human rights.

This “other legal means for the protection of human rights” can be found in Article VIII, Section 5 (5) of the 1987 Constitution which states that the Supreme Court, among others, shall have the power to promulgate rules concerning the protection and enforcement of constitutional rights. Otherwise known as the Supreme Court’s rule-making power, this is now the basis for the promulgation of the Writ of Amparo, which is seen by many as the High Court’s response to the alarming spate of human rights violations that have taken place since 2001. 

(reference:  The Rationale for the Writ of Amparo, A.M. No. 07-9-12-SC)   

PARDON WITH A PRICE

I hopped from one blog to another hoping to get a “feel” of the various reactions people have over Gloria Arroyo’s granting executive clemency to Joseph Estrada.  While some like Schumey and the Black and White Movement strongly oppose Erap’s untimely freedom, others like Arbet are not too keen on joining the anti-pardon bandwagon. 

As it turned out, Gloria Arroyo and her chief adviser Ronaldo Puno would rather risk getting the ire of the numerically inferior anti-Estrada EDSA 2 veterans than lose the potential support of Erap who until now remains to be a potent force in the political landscape of the nation. 

Indeed, desperate times call for desperate measures.  In order to divert the public’s attention, Mrs. Arroyo saw it fit to grant pardon at a time when her administration is practically on the verge of collapse due to substantiated allegations of rampant corruption coming not from the opposition but from administration allies themselves. 

By asking for pardon, Erap in effect has recognized the legitimacy of the Arroyo presidency.  Not only that, his role as the de facto leader of the opposition is now highly suspect.  I doubt if he or even his sons Jinggoy and JV will still have the nerve to criticize Mrs. Arroyo the way they used to. 

And because of the perception that Erap has struck a deal with the administration, this will ultimately lead to the break-up of the loose coalition of anti-Arroyo forces composed of former pro-Gloria civil society, religious and militant groups on the one hand and the pro-Erap group on the other.  If that happens, then Gloria will definitely have the last laugh. 

As Schumey has correctly observed, we ordinary folks are left to fend for ourselves while our supposed leaders cancel each other out in the fight for political survival. 

Arroyo.  Ramos.  de Venecia.  Estrada.  Stop pinning your hopes on them.  We have been taken for a ride for the longest time.

(photo courtesy of forums.istorya.net) 

SCANDAL AFTER SCANDAL: ARE WE NOT SURPRISED?

 

Mike Arroyo has again merited the headlines after businessman Jose de Venecia III, the Speaker’s son, implicated him in the controversial ZTE broadband deal.  Even before JDV3 named the high-profile personality who allegedly helped Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos in attempting to convince him to withdraw from the bidding, I already had the inkling that the “mystery man” could very well be the First Gentleman.  So I was not surprised that in the Senate hearing yesterday, JDV3 revealed exactly the person I had in mind. 

Mike Arroyo allegedly told him to “back off” after he insisted that his company’s offer was more advantageous for the government than that of ZTE’s proposal.  With matching gestures, he explained how the First Gentleman approached him and pointed a finger two inches away from his nose while threatening him to withdraw from the project. 

To reiterate, this latest scandal comes as no surprise.  With the way this government is being run by Arroyo and her cohorts, scandals and controversies seem to be an everyday occurrence.  However, what makes this scandal quite different from the ones before it is the noise where it’s coming from.  Unlike other whistleblowers who could easily be identified with the opposition, the current whistleblower is no less than the son of Speaker Jose de Venecia, a known Arroyo ally. 

The only motive a bystander like me could impute on JDV3 (as to why he is coming out to expose what he knows about the ZTE anomaly) was his failed bid to secure the contract that aims to interconnect all government offices from Batanes to Jolo.  Other than that, my puny brain cells could not think of any.  Although it’s one thing to allege and another to prove, JDV3’s detailed testimony before the Senate Blue Ribbon Committee cannot easily be a product of his wild imagination. 

Brenda, in her usual self, has a different take on the issue.  She wants us to believe her insane theory that JDV3 might be funded by certain groups out to oust Mrs. Arroyo before her “term” expires in 2010. 

Brilliant!  Why didn’t I think of that?  But on the one hand, a friend named Kulas, a barber in our neighborhood, exclaimed:  “Lumang tugtugin na yang rason ni Brenda, wala kasi siyang ibang mahanap na motibo para sirain ang kredibilidad ng anak ni JDV.” 

Hahaha.  Sounds like Kulas has more common sense than the antics of this woman known to exhibit tantrums in the halls of the Senate every now and then. 

Rep. Mikey Arroyo, the First Gentleman’s son, was quick to ask in a rather contemptuous voice:  “Why is it always  my father?” 

Sabi naman ni Kulas nung marinig nya ang interview kay Mikey sa TV:  “Heh.  Nagtanong ka pa!”  Bullseye!  

The only possible loophole in JDV3’s testimony, I think, is his conscious effort to exonerate President Arroyo from any involvement in the anomalous deal.  He asserts that President Arroyo had no actual knowledge on either Abalos’ attempts to broker a deal with ZTE or her husband’s intervention.  But how could the President not have known about the goings on in the negotiation stage?  Ordinary human experience tells us that the husband and the wife both share the same secrets, not unless the secret pertains to something which either spouse ought not to know.  You know what I mean.  Could this be a concession JDV3 had to make with his father before agreeing to testify in the Senate?  I could overhear JDV whisper to JDV3:  “Joey, please spare the President or I will lose my hold in the House!” 

Poor JDV.  Torn between two lovers. 

Poor Filipino.  Torn between the devil and the deep blue sea.     

REMEMBERING NINOY