THIS 'NO-WIN' SITUATION?
MANILA, JANUARY
17,
2012 (TRIBUNE) By Francisco S. Tatad -
Whether or not President Aquino is trying to influence the senators to convict
Chief Justice Renato Corona at his Senate impeachment trial may no longer be
subject to debate. The truth seems plain enough.
One would need specific proof to be able to say that the President has met
with or sent an emissary to a particular senator to ask for his or her vote. But
there may be no shortage of evidence to show that Malacaang is trying to
influence the outcome of the trial, even before it begins.
Under the Constitution, Malacaang has no role to play in the impeachment
process. The House of Representatives has the exclusive power to initiate all
cases of impeachment, and the Senate the sole power to try and decide all such
cases. The principle of separation of powers prevents the President from getting
involved.
But most of the 188 congressmen-complainants signed their complaint against
Corona without verification, at the behest of Malacaang. And the Presidents
spokesmen have waged a relentless campaign to demonize Corona since then.
Many are convinced that in trying to remove Corona through the impeachment
process, the President has rendered himself impeachable. That he now controls
the House and is assured of its political protection does not, in his critics
judgment, make him any less culpable and ultimately vulnerable.
Should the congressmen begin to value the Constitution and the common good
more than their personal accommodations, the whole thing could change, and
President Aquino could find himself exactly where the primary objects of his
enmity are situated right now.
Until now, the nation has been bamboozled by the colossal media hype about
the allegedly wide public support for what the President and his propagandists
are doing to the Corona and his family.
The propaganda pollsters and the conscript media supply and
regurgitate that dubious claim, and Malacanang appears to be the first one to
believe its own propaganda.
But what is the truth behind it? By what process can such truth be
ascertained? By another survey perhaps by the same propaganda pollsters? Not at
all. The President himself has already provided the most convincing survey.
He unwittingly did so on the eve of the Jan. 9 Black Nazarene procession in
Quiapo, Manila, when he went on national television in his weekend clothes to
warn the devotees of a possible terror attack on the procession and to dissuade
them from attending.
So nobody listened to the President, and far more than the usual one or two
million devotees trooped to the procession.
Is this not our peoples way of telling Malacaang, its apologists and
spokesmen that the masses are not as ignorant and gullible as they are made out
to be by the propaganda pollsters and the conscript media?
The people saw through Malacaangs propaganda game and decided they would not
be taken for a ride. They must have seen, just from watching television, that no
president had ever done nor would ever do what P-Noy did on that weekend.
Would President Barack Obama, for instance, go on national television to
alert any portion of the American people on the eve of the biggest American
football championship that terrorists might bomb the Super Bowl? Would the
Custodian of the Two Holy Mosques tell all the pilgrims at Mecca or Medina that
some infidels could attack the Haj?
Obama and the King would most certainly do everything to prevent any such
threat. But announce the threat to the whole world? Not a chance.
In any other place, that would be the standard response. What makes our
country and our president so different that P-Noy should freely speculate on the
possibility of a bomb blowing up devotees at the Black Nazarene rite?
Were there such a verified threat, was the presidential announcement the best
way of dealing with it?
What did the President intend to accomplish by it? And what did he finally
accomplish?
More travel advisories against the Philippines? Wasnt it his duty to exhaust
all the necessary means to frustrate any suspected plot, apprehend the culprits,
and make sure the celebration went on without a snag, without saying a word to
the public?
Now that the highest terror alert proved to be a dud, what does that make of
the President? Does it not merely tell Filipinos that they have to be especially
careful in listening to the President? Has not this incident shown us that the
Emperor has no clothes?
In employing its vast resources to demonize Corona and try to influence the
outcome of his Senate trial, is Malacaang not doing everything to undermine the
validity of the constitutional process, and to unduly multiply the political
risk to the nation and the President?
If Corona is convicted, would the nation accept it as the result of a fair
constitutional process, or would any number of thoughtful Filipinos denounce it
as the result of the unholy intervention of an interventionist President?
If, on the other hand, Corona is acquitted, despite the active propaganda
campaign against him, would the President be able to absorb and manage its cost
to the nation, to his office and to his person?
Is there anything the President is prepared to do to prevent a bad situation
from getting worse?
ABOUT THE WRITER FROM WIKIPEDIA
FRANCISCO TATAD - Senator of the Philippines -In office June 30, 1992
– June 30, 2001
Majority leader of the Senate of the Philippines -In office July 12, 2000 –
June 30, 2001
President: Joseph Estrada; Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo; Preceded by Franklin
Drilon; Succeeded by Loren Legarda;
In office October 10, 1996 – January 26, 1998; President: Fidel V. Ramos;
Preceded by Alberto Romulo; Succeeded by Franklin Drilon;
Minister for Public Information -In office 1969–1980
President: Ferdinand Marcos
Personal details: Born -October 4, 1940 (age 71) Catanduanes, Philippines;
Nationality -Filipino; Spouse- Fenny Cantero-Tatad; Relations -Shalani Soledad
(niece); Residence -Quezon City, Metro Manila, Philippines; Alma mater
-University of Santo Tomas, Harvard University Institute for International
Development, University of Asia and the Pacific Honors Received: Doctor of Laws,
Doctor of Public Administration; Profession -Politician; Religion -Roman
Catholicism
ANALYSIS: FROM THE INQUIRER WITH Reports from New
York Times News Service and Jerome Aning
'POWER CONSOLIDATION'
Critics accuse Aquino of cracking down on foes
Philippine Daily Inquirer 2:22 am | Monday, January 16th, 2012
Critics, especially veterans of the previous administration of Gloria
Macapagal-Arroyo, say the impeachment trial of Chief Justice Renato Corona
appears to be a consolidation of power by President Benigno Aquino III that will
weaken the judiciary, legislature and Constitution.
"I see this (impeachment trial) not as an effort to improve
governance but as a crackdown on the opposition," said former Sen. Richard J.
Gordon, who served as secretary of tourism under Arroyo and ran against Mr.
Aquino in the last presidential election.
"If you want to improve governance, you can go after the police and the
judges who are taking bribes. This is business as usual, going after political
enemies," Gordon added.
But some analysts say Corona's impeachment trial, which is expected to rivet
the country for months, is part of an attempt to root out corruption that Mr.
Aquino says flourished during the administration of Arroyo, who is now a
Pampanga representative.
"During his campaign, he (Mr. Aquino) made promises about going after
corruption and election fraud," said Ramon C. Casiple, executive director of the
Institute for Political and Electoral Reform. "People can see that he is doing
something about it. That is why he receives high popularity ratings."
The Aquino administration took what it called a major step against corruption
last Nov. 18, when Arroyo was arrested on charges of tampering with the results
of Senate elections in 2007. If convicted, she faces a maximum sentence of life
in prison. Last December, Arroyo and her husband were charged with corruption
related to the NBN-ZTE scandal.
Close to Corona
Gloria Arroyo is close to Corona, who served as her chief of staff before she
appointed him to the Supreme Court in April 2002. Two days after Mr. Aquino won
the May 2010 presidential election, Arroyo appointed Corona as Chief Justice, a
move that Mr. Aquino and his supporters insist was intended to derail efforts to
bring Arroyo to justice.
If Arroyo is convicted, the Chief Justice could be instrumental in having
those verdicts overturned if they reach the Supreme Court. The impeachment
allegations against Corona include corruption and bias in rulings favoring
Arroyo.
"Corona's and Arroyo's fates are intricately linked," a columnist, Conrado de
Quiros, wrote in the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
He added that Corona was "the one person to assure" that Arroyo "would not be
prosecuted, the one person to open a crack for a possible comeback, the one
person to assure that, as in her time, the law can exist independently of
justice and be used to enforce the culture of impunity."
Questionable tactics
Ferdinand Topacio, a lawyer representing the Arroyo couple in the corruption
case, accused Mr. Aquino of resorting to questionable tactics that would have
long-term negative implications.
"If you are removing the Chief Justice so you can convict (Arroyo), that is a
shortsighted view of our system and our Constitution," he said. "This damages
our Constitution."
Gordon echoed concerns that the impeachment proceedings might bring
unintended consequences, particularly from the military, which had repeatedly
sought to take over the government in the past three decades.
"I am not against President Aquino," he said. "But he is not respecting the
judiciary, and I don't want these principles of separation of powers destroyed.
He is also in danger of encouraging the coup plotters in the military because
they see that he is not following the law."
Checks and balances
The National Union of Peoples' Lawyers (NUPL), which counsels victims of
human rights abuses, said the impeachment trial should preserve and strengthen
the system of checks and balances in a democratic system.
"While it is the Chief Justice on the dock, the independence, credibility and
integrity of our institutions will all be put to the test in this trial," NUPL
secretary general Edre Olalia said in a statement.
"It (impeachment trial) will not serve its purpose if the result would be a
judiciary that is subservient to the dictates of the other branches of
government," Olalia added.
Casiple ruled out a weakening of the judiciary, constitutional standoff or
return to a dictatorship if the Senate handled properly the impeachment trial.
"It (impeachment trial) may make for a better judicial institution by serving
as a springboard for reforms in the administration of justice. Or, it may
bamboozle the courts and undermine the system of supposed checks and balances
and be the opening to monopoly of power," he said.
Florin T. Hilbay, a constitutional scholar at the University of the
Philippines, predicted that the live telecast of the impeachment hearings would
increase Mr. Aquino's popularity by showing citizens that the President was
taking action he promised.
"I don't think these proceedings will have a long-term damaging effect" on
the Constitution, Hilbay said. "I think people will be more amused than
personally affected. People enjoy the drama." Reports from
New York Times News Service and Jerome Aning
Chief News Editor: Sol Jose Vanzi
© Copyright, 2012 by PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE
All
rights reserved
PHILIPPINE
HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE [PHNO] WEBSITE
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------
Follow us on Twitter: http://twitter.com/phnotweet
This is the PHILIPPINE HEADLINE NEWS ONLINE (PHNO) Mailing List.
To stop receiving our news items, please send a blank e-mail addressed to: phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Please visit our homepage at: http://www.newsflash.org/
(c) Copyright 2009. All rights reserved.
-------------------------------------------------------------Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/phno/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
phno-digest@yahoogroups.com
phno-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
phno-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
