Democracy is not just about the one who shouts loudest

Belinda Olivares-Cunanan, Philippine Daily Inquirer, Asia News Network/Manila

A U.S. embassy intelligence report on the Philippine situation last April, as reported on Sept. 18 in this newspaper, was off tangent in several parts. The embassy official who wrote it must have talked to the wrong persons and accessed the wrong sources.

For one thing, he obviously misread the Philippine military's psyche. Had he paused and made a deeper analysis of the Edsa People Power I and II uprisings, and even the so-called failed "Edsa III" of May 1, 2001, he would have sensed the folly of his assessment. He would have realized that a more profound reason of national significance must exist for even a part of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) to seriously consider moving against duly constituted authority.

The report also said that a declaration of emergency rule by President Gloria Arroyo would sufficiently rouse the military to move, as it is against the suppression of citizens' rights. Anyone in this country would know that such declaration would be received with hostility principally by the leftists and militant elements in the Catholic Church and civil society. But the military could find such a declaration convenient and helpful in fighting its traditional leftist enemies who have become quite aggressive in the military and political fields.

Then, too, the report gave undue credit to armed non-military groups that she supposedly could mobilize in case the military goes against her. I'm afraid the report paid too much credence to the earlier threat by some governors to secede from the republic in case Arroyo was ousted.

One possible consequence of this April 2005 U.S. Embassy report falling into the hands of opposition leaders was to encourage them in their efforts to topple Arroyo and grab power for themselves. Given our colonial mentality, they probably believed the assessment that the climate was ripe for her ouster.

Thus, the grand conspiracy against Arroyo that they had been planning for years now got the green light. Within two months, the opposition began simultaneous hearings of the "jueteng" illegal lottery scandal in the Senate (triggered by a resolution filed by Senate President Franklin Drilon) and the "Garci tapes" in the House of Representatives, under full coverage by national TV, radio and print.

The tipping point was planned for that Friday in July, with four widely publicized demands for Arroyo's resignation by the "Hyatt 10" group of former Cabinet officials, former President Cory Aquino, Drilon and his Liberal Party faction, and a sector of the Makati Business Club. Failing to oust Arroyo, as her sympathizers rallied around her, the opposition resorted to street demonstrations and high-pressure tactics in the media to unseat her.

But unable to gather respectable crowds outside of Makati City Mayor Jejomar Binay's hakot and the groups carrying red flags, the opposition turned to an impeachment complaint that it had earlier derided as useless. Three weeks later, the House threw out the impeachment complaint and today Arroyo remains President.

Last Saturday, this newspaper began an analysis of how the House decided to junk the impeachment case by an overwhelming majority of 158 to 51 votes. I earlier pointed out that among the reasons was a series of blunders by the opposition.

Moreover, in seeking to piggyback on the Lozano complaint, the opposition packed its own amended complaint with new and separate issues, giving the majority a reason to declare it as a separate complaint. Then, too, the opposition rejected the draft rules of the 13th Congress that would have allowed the consolidation of the two complaints.

The opposition argued that these points were "mere technicalities" invoked by the majority to keep the truth sealed. This was quite persuasive to the public, but the majority's legal eagles, among them Representatives Douglas Cagas of Davao and Marcelino Libanan of Eastern Samar, held their ground. The battle lines were drawn between constitutionality and the rule of law, on the one hand, and an appeal to the emotions, on the other hand.

The boorish and haughty behavior of some opposition members at times was a contrast to that of the amiable and ever-patient justice committee chair, Rep. Simeon Datumanong. When the committee was about to vote on the legality of the amended complaint, opposition members walked out, tossing paper all over the session hall.

This unparliamentary behavior cost them a lot of points. The self-righteousness of some opposition leaders also didn't sit well with the majority, particularly since some of the former had their own credibility problem, having been associated closely with the discredited regimes of Presidents Marcos and Estrada, while others had skeletons in their closet.

During the plenary voting, many congressmen denied that cheating took place in their districts. Davao Rep. Antonio Floirendo pointed out that "most of my people die without ever seeing a lawyer and they don't quote Fr. Joaquin Bernas. But they know right from wrong." The opposition had every opportunity to ventilate their case, so that "if they lost, it was their fault." He added: "Representative democracy is not about who shouts the loudest, but about following laws and principles."