Impeachment Process Stalled

Posted by Alecks Pabico 
PCIJ

AS expected, the opening of the House justice committee hearing this morning to determine the impeachment complaint's sufficiency in form went haywire, abruptly halted less than half an hour into the proceedings with the committee chairman Rep. Simeon Datumanong (Maguindanao, Lakas-CMD) ordering its suspension until next Tuesday and subsequently calling for an executive session among its members.

Datumanong actually set the tone of the stalled hearing by stating what he said is an "unprecedented" case before the justice committee — the existence of "three complaints filed against the same impeachable official and referred to them one after the other on the same day. 

"We may have these preliminary questions to consider," Datumanong said. "One, are we going to consider them one by one as they were referred by the House? Or are we going to consolidate them like bills on the same subject matter pending before the committee? Or do we find out what is the effect of the amended complaint on the first complaint of Atty. Oliver Lozano?"

The committee chair said that only after a decision has been made on these questions can the committee proceed to the determination of sufficiency in form.

Taking his cue from Datumanong's opening remarks, Rep. Edcel Lagman (Albay, Aksyon Demokratiko) seized the opportunity to raise his own set of "prejudicial questions" that he said need to be fully debated and subsequently resolved by the committee in order to determine which complaint(s) shall be subject to the committee's jurisdiction. Lagman's questions are as follows:

• Was the amended complaint which was filed on July 25, 2005 properly or seasonably interposed or is it a prohibited pleading under Article XI of the Constitution and the pertinent Rules on Impeachment of the House of Representatives?

• Considering that the amended complaint was filed on July 25, 2005 when the House had not yet adopted the Rules of Procedure on Impeachment in the 13th Congress, under what standard or rule should the filing of the amended complaint be assessed?

• Since the amended complaint radically and substantially supplanted the original Lozano complaint, should it be considered as a separate, independent and new complaint?

• If it is considered a separate or new complaint, is it barred by the one-year rule which proived that "no impeachment proceedings shall be initiated against the same official more than once within period of one year." (Sec. 3 (5) of Article XI)?

• How will the amended complaint be assessed under the standard or definition of initiating impeachment proceedings in the case of Ernesto B/ Francisco Jr., et. al. vs. the House of Representatives, et. al.?

• Did the amended complaint supersed the original Lozano complaint so much so that the Lozano complaint will be subsumed under the amended complaint and consdiering further that Atty. Oliver Lozano signed the verification attached to the amended complaint thereby giving his conformity to the amended complaint?

• What is the import and effect of the respondent's filing of an early answer on the amended complaint?

Datumanong then told the committee that only members, including ex-officio members, will be allowed to participate in the debates.

At that point, two congressmen took turns in raising logistical issues of the not-so-easy access to microphones and the cramped space. Rep. Douglas Cagas (Davao del Sur, NPC) complained that some members were seated behind those occupying the front row, not allowing them the "equal opportunity to be able to speak out."

Rep. Mayo Almario (Davao Oriental, Lakas-CMD) was even more blatant. "May we know if there are first class and second class members of this House?" he asked. "I think we here are considered second class members because we are not entitled to the same privileges of those who are seated in front of us."

Meanwhile, Rep. Rolex Suplico (Iloilo, LDP) sought for a reconsideration of Datumanong's ruling. "As per my understanding based on the tradition of this House, the other members who are not members of this committee are allowed to ask questions for their own understanding because later on they will participate in the plenary hearings on the impeachment complaint," he said.

The committee chair, however, insisted that only regular members, including ex-officio members, of the committee will be recognized as it is "not any ordinary committee of the House, and pursuant to the mandate of the Constitution."

Datumanong added that the other members of the House who were present in the hearing — complainants or endorsers of the impeachment complaint — were invited because of their status but may not enjoy the same privileges in the matter of debate as members of the committee.

As a commotion started to break out, Datumanong was forced to call for a one-minute recess, and later, a suspension of the proceedings.

In the executive session, committee members argued at length what the minority bloc called Datumanong's "unilateral ruling" to suspend the hearing. They, however, later agreed to adopt procedures for the next hearings, now scheduled from noon to four in the afternoon every Tuesday and Wednesday. To be able to comply with the 60-session day requirement for the justice committee to come up with its report to the House, the debates will be limited to regular members (including ex-officio ones), co-complainants and endorsers. The committee is left with the discretion of allowing non-members to participate only after the said members have taken their turns.

On the sidelight, there was also a curious battle of symbols. Some women who were not in favor of the impeachment wore blue ribbons and Philippine flag pins. The pro-impeachment audience, obviously displeased withe the outcome, had "Impeach" buttons, peach ribbons and roses bearing "Impeach Gloria" tags. 

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Tangled web

Inquirer News Service

A TANGLED web of charges, countercharges, witnesses and counter-witnesses is all the country has to show for all the efforts of its leaders. No institution has emerged unscathed and unsullied. The administration is presenting -- and demolishing -- witnesses with as much viciousness and enthusiasm as the opposition, while the Catholic Church, the military, the police, media and civil society have all gotten into the act, in one way or another. Everyone has a witness, and everybody else has found a way to destroy that witness.

It is not our role to play prosecutor for either side, but it is our responsibility to point out the depths of irresponsibility and ruthlessness our major political players have sunk into. One side presents someone, only for that person to retract his story or modify it to the extent that his testimony becomes hopelessly muddled. Large sums of cash are just some of the considerations that are allegedly dangled. The use of police power, legal threats and personal appeals add to a general picture of power being used for the sake of power, and not in the search for the truth or the greater good. What is happening now serves as an indictment of the low regard in which the major players hold the public. Innuendo and slander are replacing facts; demolishing -- and not building up -- a case is the name of the game.

The public knows that when a witness bursts into tears, begging the forgiveness of the First Family, the tears weren't inspired by a sudden call to greatness, but most likely by a promise of cash to make crying worthwhile. The public also knows that when a witness with a large number of police officers hovering in the background steps forward to demolish the testimony of another witness, that demolition is inspired as much by fear of the policemen's guns as it is by a desire to tell the truth. The truth, such as it is, is only this: that both sides regard it as something that can be changed and modified at will.

The personal nature of the charges and countercharges is increasingly reflected in the persons perceived to be behind them. There is the President, with her loyal lieutenants moving heaven and earth to demolish hostile testimony. There is the opposition, moving with equal resolve to keep producing witnesses who will testify at least until new witnesses can be produced. On a certain level, it is perhaps more understandable to see the President and her people, moving with such ferociousness, since the life of the administration is on the line. It is less understandable to see opposition leaders virtually abandoning all pretense to either objectivity or statesmanship.

Sen. Panfilo Lacson has warned that if President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo wants to make this a personal match, he would gladly accommodate her. After being accused of being the main mobilizer of witnesses against the President, Lacson has vowed to redouble his efforts to produce damaging witnesses.

The problem is that Lacson is a senator, and belongs to a body that everyone expects to hear the charges leveled against the President. We have heard time and again that an impeachment is a political process, that it isn't expected to be composed of completely impartial individuals, but neither is it expected to be a body devoid of even the appearance of having an open mind.

Public opinion has spoken out strongly in favor of the impeachment process. While some sectors have called for senators who have clearly expressed a position unfavorable to the President to inhibit themselves, this call has not been taken up by the majority. The public knows better than to expect a fair hearing of the administration case from the likes of the Estradas, mother and son, for example. Their hostile questioning will be par for the course, and their vote a foregone conclusion. But even the Estradas have resisted the urge to volunteer to do the job of the House of Representatives, which is, if it resists the temptation to throw out the impeachment complaint, to prosecute the case before the Senate. There is partisanship, and there is such a thing as crossing the line. Lacson has exhibited both.

This week should see the debate over the complaints in the House heating up. It should also mark the start of a period of preparation and reflection in the Senate. Few institutions get a second chance to prove themselves capable of living up to the highest, instead of the lowest, expectations of the public. The Senate, unless denied that opportunity by the House, will have that chance.

Glo's Jueteng

Posted by Vinia Datinguinoo 
PCIJ

SEVEN of every ten (71 percent) Filipinos believe allegations that some top government officials are involved in jueteng operations in the country, says a Pulse Asia survey done July 2 to 14. The proportion increased from the 64 percent found by a similar survey in June. Four percent say they do not believe the reports; the remaining 24 percent are undecided.

The same Pulse Asia survey found 81 percent of respondents saying they believe accusations that some members of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's family are involved in and benefit from the illegal numbers game. Sixteen percent do not believe the reports. Pulse Asia notes that the highest percentage of those who do not believe the charges against the Arroyo family is in the Visayas, where the President enjoys her highest approval ratings amid allegations that she may have used jueteng money to support her candidacy in 2004.

Pulse Asia's nationwide survey was conducted while calls for the President's resignation were being made by various sectors and key members of her Cabinet quit their posts.

Read Pulse Asia's report. 

Glo's Fairy Tales

Gloria Governs the Philippines by Delusion
By William Esposo
INQ7.net

FROM her last SONA (State of the Nation Address) to the on-going media blitz, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo now governs by delusion. Regarded by most as an illegitimate president, she now weaves fairy tales to extend the life of her incumbency. As a journalist is committed to espouse the truth and expose lies and half truths, so do I find it my most sacred duty to help clear the smokescreen and the layers and layers of cobwebs that have been spun around the plight and poor state of the nation. No country can ever move forward on decision-making based on false assumptions, premises and in our case, even deliberately-spun myths. When Germany lost its national pride and soul after World War I, the Germans were desperately eager to reinstate what they believed was the lost splendor of their race and their country. They blindly embraced Adolf Hitler's megalomaniac promise of the Thousand Year Reich. To them, Hitler was the messiah that will reconnect Germany's allegedly glorious past to their supposedly glorious future. The truth finally caught up with the Nazi Reich. Germany and its people ended up with a country in tatters and a people that had to live with the shame and ignominy of being part of a regime that had inflicted some of the most atrocious crimes against humanity. A good doctor will want to summon all sophisticated technology - X-rays, MRI's, Ultrasound and all of today's modern gizmos - just to ensure the accuracy of his diagnosis. Only then can that doctor feel confident about prescribing a cure. But a government which deliberately enshrouds the injury, the pain and the true state of its people's conditions with false pictures of normality because this is the only way it can continue to rule and escape blame for its own sins, can only do further harm. If we allow this era of mythmaking and the spinning of delusions to wreak havoc on our lives and our country, we will only be facilitating the spread of our political and social gangrene. If our nation is to make the right decisions that will reverse our downward spiral, those decisions must be based on the truth and nothing but the truth. The truth about Charter Change Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo had acquiesced to the formula proffered by Fidel V. Ramos (FVR) and Joe de Venecia (JDV) because their party, the Lakas-CMD, happens to be the last bastion of support for her foundering regime. This reminds me of the fate that befell Richard III in the Shakespearean play bearing the same title. When Richard III lost the Battle of Bosworth to the Earl of Richmond (later, Henry VII), he cried out: "A horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse!" He was rhetorically offering his lost kingdom for a horse. After having gained the crown in a ruthless manner, he now bargains to offer his lost crown to save his life but to no avail. In the case of Macapagal-Arroyo, it is now her 'kingdom' (and her life) in exchange for charter change. But the truth is Charter change will not bring about our desired reforms for as long as the same wolves and hyenas that now populate Congress will also become the members of the proposed parliament. Under these circumstances, by combining executive and legislative functions, charter change can only bestow more power to JDV and his ilk. It would be better to give the Mafia law enforcement functions. So what salvation is there in charter change? Do you see JDV and his gang of power brokers in congress suddenly acting responsibly and instead of thinking of how to further their interests, will now think of the people? Do you see them passing the anti-dynasty and the anti-turncoatism (party switching) acts finally? If you are a businessman, can you now see them as an ally instead of that "gang of extortionists and thieves" many businesses dread and fear? Our biggest problem is the people running the system and less of the system itself. Unless the nation develops that capability to become a mature and viable democracy where its citizens perform their appropriate roles to achieve common good, we can only pull ourselves lower and lower in the social abyss. Charter change is the recourse of election losers and trapos like Joe de Venecia who know fully well that he can never win an election where votes of real people are counted. In 1998, people's nausea over the trapo stereotype dumped JDV's presidential fantasy. Despite JDV's massive party machinery and the support of then incumbent president FVR, the electorate's disgust revealed itself in an unequivocal rejection for JDV. Now, JDV and his ilk seek to change the rules of the game so that they can govern as prime minister under the parliamentary system. Do we now allow JDV to amass power as prime minister under a parliamentary system that will in effect make him even more powerful than a president? National seppuku would perhaps bring about a kinder end to all our problems than this. The truth about Gloria's replacement The biggest yarn being foisted on the country is that nobody can replace Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The fact that we have a vice-president who does not inspire confidence and an opposition which is not credible reinforces belief for this myth. But any self-respecting Filipino cannot and should not accept the claims of Macapagal-Arroyo and her spinmeisters that she is irreplaceable. How can Macapagal-Arroyo who brought us to our worst economic and political crisis be irreplaceable? If we are to believe that, then we may as well sell this country to the highest bidding superpower, China or the US. If that is the case, then we might as well stop calling ourselves Filipinos and stop pretending to have a national identity and pride. That kind of thinking puts us in a worse category than slaves who have been known in history to have fiercely and unceasingly fought for their freedom. This thinking smacks of a cowardly, defeatist attitude and a lack of faith in one's own race. The truth is that Filipinos are running the world. Our brave and enterprising OFWs are making their presence felt in various fields of endeavor all over the world, in industries, films, art, entertainment, hospitals, households, and so forth. Even from within our rotten political system, we do have a few good men and women who will make a better president than Macapagal-Arroyo. Given a snap election scenario, right off the bat - I cite Quezon City Mayor Sonny Belmonte, a former and successful general manager of GSIS and president of PAL during the Cory years (and these were the times when GSIS and PAL were profitable), former representative and Speaker of the House of Representatives. When Sonny took over Quezon City, the city coffers were empty, the city was bankrupt. Barely three years after he took over, Quezon City became the richest local government in the country. Considering that one of our biggest problems is our fiscal deficit, logic dictates that Sonny Belmonte is the best man for the job. Not only that, Sonny comes from the middle class and never showed any desire to join the 'big elite' club of the country. The Belmonte family is financially comfortable owing to the fruits of their labor which is the highly-profitable operations of the Philippine STAR and the STAR group of publications. I have not heard of any scandal - whether regarding money or sexual interludes - that has been leveled against Sonny. On these points of comparison alone, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo cannot even dream to compare herself with Sonny Belmonte. In terms of executive experience (GSIS, PAL, Quezon City local government) and legislative experience (representative and Speaker of the House of Representatives), Gloria is dwarfed by Sonny. In terms of integrity, Sonny is not hounded by scandals. He was married to the late Betty Go Belmonte, a devout and virtuous wife, mother, friend, businesswoman and a model Christian. In contrast, the incumbent is married to one whose track record of scandals and controversies had made him some sort of a national calamity. To compare with presidential son Mikey, Sonny has sons Miguel, Isaac, and Kevin Belmonte. Take my word for it, as I know the Belmonte family well, there is no comparison. With all these superlatives going for him, so how come Sonny Belmonte is not our president? Blame that on our corrupt political system which requires any good man to compromise his principles in order to win the presidency. You will need no less than Ali Baba's hoard if you care to even dream of financing a viable presidential campaign. And for the most part, we have only ourselves to blame for electing the likes of Joseph Estrada and Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo - when in fact and in truth we do have much better presidential candidates to choose from. We are the stockholders of Philippine democracy. So why don't we vote for the right people? You may email William M. Esposo at: w_esposo@yahoo.com

Comelec's Free Fall

Posted by Alecks Pabico 
PCIJ

IF today's elections in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao (ARMM) labor under serious doubts and suspicions, the Commission on Elections, the constitutionally ordained guardian of the ballot, is mostly to blame for it.  When the taped conversations between Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and former elections commissioner Virgilio Garcillano were made public, providing clues of the rigging that attended the May 2004 elections with the help of Comelec field personnel, public opinion has been split into only two extreme calls, the mass resignation of its commissioners and the poll body's total abolition.

"The Comelec's Fall from Grace," featured in the i Report special issue, details the story of an institution that has allowed itself to be destroyed by unending scandals involving corruption, incompetence, and partisanship.

The reform era ushered by Edsa 1 that put men and women of integrity the likes of Hilario Davide Jr., Haydee Yorac and Christian Monsod at the helm of the Comelec is now a thing of the past. The supposedly impartial elections body today "reeks of the politics of accommodation, one that has allowed politicians to stack it with officials and staff that they have endorsed."

No less than the Office of the President — from the time of Fidel Ramos to Arroyo — has contributed to the weakening of the Comelec by politicizing the appointments of commissioners.

Reinforcing this culture of patronage and corruption is the commissioner-in-charge (CIC) system being implemented in place of the old bureacracy of regional directors and an executive director erstwhile given to collegiality. Under the CIC system, directors have become mere pawns taking orders from the commissioner. Eve the international election monitoring mission that observed the May 2004 elections found the CIC system "seriously flawed and largely dysfunctional" as officials and staff have become beholden to the commissioners.

Such a system has allowed Garcillano to thrive and become the most powerful commissioner, in fact, the de facto chairman of the Comelec in the last elections.

Read on at pcij.org. 

No Compromises

There's The Rub : A good man

Conrado de Quiros dequiros@info.com.ph
Inquirer News Service

THE LAST time I saw Raul Roco was late last year at the Bantayog ng mga Bayani. He was there, along with people who still knew how to be grateful, to bear witness to the induction of a few more Filipinos into the nation's pantheon of heroes. Among them was a good friend of his, Bobbit Sanchez. Raul looked so much better than he did during the campaign, and I told him so. He was pleased with my assessment and said that was probably because he still had much to do.

Alas, his sojourn on earth would not remain long. I would hear from Vic, Bobbit's son, that days before Raul died, he had been heard in his twilight hours to carry on snatches of conversations with Bobbit. Well, he can at least be assured of pleasant company where he is now. Though it wouldn't hurt, from where I stand, for him to be given a share of Bobbit's company as well in the Wall of Remembrance. Heaven knows plain decency in public office has taken on the proportions of exceptional heroism in this country.

That is what makes Raul Roco straddle this world like a colossus, as Cassius said of Caesar, despite his seeming failures. He was-a good man.

He was a decent politician in an occupation grown more indecent over the years, he was a principled lawyer in a country grown more lawless over the years, he was an honorable man in a world where honor sold more cheaply than DVDs in Quiapo. His virtues are not hard to see, his light is made brighter all the more by the darkness that suffuses this land, particularly that part found in the Palace by the Pasig River.

I will always remember him in three contexts that reveal his character more than anything else.

The first one was during the height of the Erap (Joseph Estrada) impeachment trial. A young lawyer, Jasmin Banal, who had worked in a law firm that created dummy corporations for Erap, took the stand. Miriam Defensor-Santiago tried to demolish her credibility by asking her why she transferred from that firm to another one that offered lower pay.

Santiago said: "So you made the unusual deviation from the usual career path, since you and I and all UP law graduates virtually pursue the same career path after graduation. Isn't that so? We try and get the highest salary we can get... But in your case, you transferred from a law office with a higher salary to a law office with a lower salary. Is that correct?" Banal replied, "Yes." Santiago commented, "Remarkable."

When it was Raul's turn, he had this dialogue with Banal: Raul: "We in San Beda Law, we were taught that law is a noble profession, it is not a business. Am I right to assume that you in UP Law were taught the same thing?" Banal: "Yes, Your Honor." Raul: "What is written on the UP Law School, engraved in stone?" Banal: "The business of a law school is not to teach law but to teach law in the grand manner." Raul: "We are brothers and sisters in the profession, we should always be motivated by a sense of idealism. Is this correct?" Banal: "Yes, Your Honor." Raul: "So when you transfer from a higher-paying job to a lower-paying job, that is not necessarily an erroneous career decision? In fact, it could be motivated by a sense of idealism?" Banal: "Yes, Your Honor."

Raul: "Yes. I thought that should be elicited because I was surprised to learn that the usual career path of lawyers is going from lower-paying jobs to higher-paying jobs."

Infuriated, Santiago vented her ire on the gallery and made them grasp the meaning of law by having three of them-Dante Jimenez, Bettina Aboitiz and Rosanna Tuason-Fores-forcibly removed from the premises. The reason? "They were eyeing me provocatively."

The second incident was during a visit to Naga during the Peñafrancia Fiesta some years ago. Raul was a devout believer in "Ina," which is how Bicolanos call Our Lady of Peñafrancia. He credited her with many miracles in his life, not least how his wife, Sonia, survived being trapped in the rubble of the Nevada Hotel in the Baguio earthquake of 1990.

It was September 2003, and the surveys were still talking about him as the candidate to beat in the elections. When we saw each other in Naga, the first thing he asked me was whether I had already paid my visit to "Ina." His voice was earnest. I said, yes, I had just dropped by the Cathedral. I did not add that, not being tremendously religious, I did it more out of a devout wish to soak in nostalgia than out of a compelling need to fall to my knees in devout prayer. When we were kids, we used to occupy the part of the church near the altar as the choir, fighting off the vapors of sleep in early morning. We were the honors class, and for some reason-completely fallaciously in my case-the school authorities seemed to have believed that sound voices lurked in sound minds.

Raul seemed in such great anxiety about the state of my soul. He genuinely looked relieved at my answer and said no one may be too busy to attend to the affairs of heaven. He never advertised his religious convictions, he kept them to himself. It was between him and his God. He never claimed to have been anointed by God and ordered to cheat his way to the presidency. He probably figured that if he told a lie, it wasn't just that God would know, it was that he would.

And finally Raul had no end of stories to tell about his father. His father was a farmer who showed him that he had much to learn from the land. One day, when he was a small boy, he and his father were walking along the fields when his father stopped and pointed out the grain to him. "Look at the rice stalks," his father said. "When they are empty, they hold their heads high. When they are full, they bow their heads. Follow the example of the grain." To the end of his life, Raul never forgot that lesson.

He lived to be a good man.

Lasting Change

Public Lives : Change

Randy David randolf@pacific.net.ph
Inquirer News Service

WE tend to think of change as something to achieve rather than as something to recognize. We talk of effecting changes in our value system or in the structure of our society-little suspecting that the seeds of such changes have already been sown. It is my contention here that the continuing crisis in our national life may be no more than the symptom of the stresses created by uncoordinated changes that have taken place over many years in various spheres of our society. We only need to read the signs.

"Culture," says the anthropologist Clifford Geertz, "moves rather like an octopus-not all at once in a smoothly coordinated synergy of parts, a massive co-action of the whole, but by disjointed movements of this part, then that, and now the other, which somehow cumulate to directional change." What Geertz notes about cultures may as well apply to entire societal systems. Their various parts move in unplanned ways over time, without taking the whole mass with them as they head in one or other direction. The impulses toward change may come from any part, and their effect on the whole system is largely unpredictable. Some impulses are more consequential than others.

In her last State of the Nation Address, President Macapagal-Arroyo appeared to be guided by some version of this theory when she said that the nation's political system has lagged behind its economic system. She argued that our political problems are the outcomes of an outmoded presidential and unitary system of government. We may change leaders, she says, but if we don't change the system, the outcomes will be the same. She paints herself as a victim, and blames the system for the dysfunctions of her administration. To her, the solution is simple: change the form of government to a federal parliamentary government.

This shift in perspective from persons to systems is not entirely wrong, and indeed, it is time we focused on systemic change. But Ms Arroyo's analysis is flawed in at least two ways. First, she does not really tell us what changes have taken place in our economic life that would support the claim of an impending economic take-off. Second, she explains the crisis of her presidency merely as the result of a stalemate between executive and legislative powers, of the gridlock between the two houses of Congress, and of the tendency to use people power to oust a president who has fallen out of favor.

These gridlocks may be real, but to project them as the causes of Ms Arroyo's failure as a leader is to tax the imagination. What have they got to do with the practices that have become the emblems of her presidency-the massive and organized electoral fraud, the conversion of public funds into campaign largesse, the deployment of the military and the police for partisan politics, and the distribution of choice positions in the public bureaucracy as political rewards?

Ms Arroyo may indeed be the child of a dysfunctional and obsolete political system. But this system is dysfunctional not in the sense that it blocks governance but in the sense that it serves only the interests of those who monopolize political and economic life. And it is obsolete not in the sense that it lags behind an imagined economic take-off, but in the sense that it cannot contain the new political consciousness that is emerging among our people.

The word "dysfunction" has a precise meaning in the social sciences. It refers to outcomes that prevent the larger system from maintaining itself. A political system becomes dysfunctional when it can no longer set realizable goals and mobilize public effort toward their achievement. It is the story of our political life. Over the years, politics in our country has been a contest among rival factions of the elite. Governmental power is prized because it is the main factor in economic accumulation. Paul D. Hutchcroft, who studied the links between politics and banking in our country, used the term "booty capitalism" to describe this arrangement.

Something changed in our political landscape, and that change the elite did not anticipate. With the growth of cities and the spread of urban living, the old modes of voter management based on layers of patron-client reciprocity were eroded. Politicians found themselves having to spend more during elections. The two-party system that martial law killed could not be revived upon the return of formal democracy. As a result, political recruitment became dependent on "winnability," and mass media exposure became a crucial factor.

But most importantly, from the mid-'70s, something changed in our social landscape. Overseas work became the dynamic element in the country's economic life. OFW remittances funded the college education of millions of young people from poor families. Consumption patterns throughout the country changed overnight. Television sets and personal computers became ordinary fixtures in many OFW homes, making way for new forms of consciousness. Returning OFWs brought home with them new values, new expectations about the role of government, and new notions about the basic entitlements of ordinary citizens.

The OFW phenomenon is an impulse that is revolutionizing our way of life beyond what we can imagine. Its overall impact is pulling our political system toward greater democracy, more transparency in government, and more accountability in public life. Politicians rooted in the old ways of patronage and corruption, like Ms Arroyo, are increasingly unable to take leadership roles in this emerging society. This crisis is telling us that the old is dying, and something new is about to be born.

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Balance

Inquirer News Service

IT DOES seem strange when a religious leader and a foreign diplomat tackle an issue from different perspectives and arrive at similar conclusions. Recently, in his departure statement, controversial American chargé d'affaires Joseph Mussomeli said that the Philippines needs to concentrate on fixing the system, instead of focusing on personalities. On the other hand, Manila Archbishop Gaudencio Rosales has been pointing out that focusing on President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's credibility and legitimacy ignores the unresolved question of justice for the crimes of other leaders.

Both men were focusing on a development that is increasingly becoming evident in the current political crisis. That is the effort by people from all walks of life to separate the question of a person's fitness for office from the broader responsibilities of the public for the continuation of a system that leads to questionable-and questioned-leadership.

Of course, this naturally leads to the question of whether or not the President is correct in saying the problem is the system and not her. But was that what both the archbishop of Manila and the departing American diplomat were saying?

No. Ms Arroyo cannot focus on the system without facing up to her role as leader of that system. Resolving the question of the President's fitness for office is, in fact, the first step toward beginning the process of instituting far wider, and deeply needed, change.

It might be more accurate to interpret the statements of Mussomeli as being representative of the interests of the nation he serves. The United States craves stability among its allies and does not want additional problems from allies going through some political turmoil. The United States is also interested in having the outcome of the political crisis reflect American values-and influence-in a positive, and not a negative, manner. This ties in with the dominant ideology of the Bush administration, which views democracy as an essential tool for perpetuating American influence and power.

On the other hand, the Manila archbishop is grappling with the problem of a local Catholic Church that has lent a moral dimension to people power in the past, and a Church that has insisted that governance should reflect Christian principles in action. Despite playing a major role in both Edsa People Power I and II, the Church has failed -- and has admitted its failure -- to achieve a long-lasting and effective transformation both among the leaders and the governed. It has helped provide the symbols for people power; it is now trying to figure out how it can contribute to a more lasting effect for people power.

In their messages to the Filipino public, both these men reflect the particular interests of the organizations to which they belong: in Mussomeli's case, his government; in Rosales' case, the Catholic Church. The reaction of the public should be as critical as it is appreciative, in that both messages do provide food for thought. However, neither message should be uncritically accepted, or unthinkingly rejected out of hand.

It is clear that an effort is under way among many sectors in society to think and plan for the future. Part of that process includes looking back at the past, but also not looking superficially at the present. The challenges the nation faces certainly go beyond political spin, or the interpretations or arguments of any one leader or institution.

The danger of having an overly institutional bias toward the present crisis is that it ignores the human, and thus moral, dimension necessary to achieve a fair, and lasting, positive outcome. Everyone, we believe, wants this crisis to result in a better Philippines. That will come only if a balance is found between judging the political fortunes of one individual and determining our collective fate, through a system or reforms to the system we arrive at as a whole, not put in place by one faction obsessed with winning over others. There are warnings that are too important to assess superficially or answer with sound bites.

True Patriot

Accolades pour in for Roco
Joel Francis Guinto Veronica Uy Maila Ager
INQ7.net

A TRUE patriot and freedom fighter, and the "best president the country never had."

As the country mourns the passing of former senator Raul Roco, messages pour in remembering kindly the politician whom idealists and reformists said they once pinned their hopes on.

"If history will later view Raul Roco as the best president the country never had, no one will contest such a judgment," Camarines Sur Representative Rolando Andaya said Friday.

He said Roco had set the template on excellence and ethics in public service "such that future aspirants for the presidency must demonstrate proof that they are as good as him."

"The Roco standard has been attached to the highest office of the land," Andaya said of his provincemate.

Presidential spokesperson Ignacio Bunye said Roco's death is "a great loss for our nation."

"He was an exemplary lawyer, legislator and leader who inspired many with not just his words, but with his actions," Bunye said.

Roco, who challenged President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo in last year's presidential race, passed away on Friday after a long battle with cancer. He was 63.

Bukidnon Representative Juan Miguel Zubiri said if there was an office higher than the Office of the President, that would be the "Office of the Patriot" which Roco occupied.

"Fate may have not smiled kindly on his bid to lead the country, but his legacy of clean, competent and committed public service will last longer than those who, were able to occupy high positions, but did not, however, serve its highest ideals," Zubiri said.

"For this, Raul Roco now belongs to the ages," he said.

Opposition Representative Ronaldo Zamora of San Juan also grieved the loss of a close friend whom he described as "a bright and hard-working person.

"He's one of [the most] decent persons I know. His kindest principles remain appealing to the kind of society we're in," he said.

Zamora said he and Roco worked together as deputy majority leaders from 1987 to 1992.

Foreign Affairs Secretary Alberto Romulo described Roco as "an esteemed colleague in the Senate, instrumental in landmark legislations in the Senate and Congress." Saying Roco, who served as Arroyo's education secretary before he ran against her in the polls, was "irreplaceable," Romulo added: "He conducted himself in public office with integrity and in statesmanship."

Former president Fidel Ramos praised Roco as "very brilliant and outstanding" lawyer and public servant. "I deeply regret his passing."

"I know Mrs. [Sonia] Roco and the brothers of the late senator, and I hope their feelings of loss will be assuaged by the fact that he has created for himself a special place in Philippine history," said Ramos.

"Raul's brand of leadership is just among the legacies that he left behind," Senator Manuel Villar said in a statement. "As a candidate in the last presidential election, he was the first to concede defeat--a mark of a true gentleman and statesman."

Roco ran against Arroyo in the May 2004 elections under the banner of his own party, the Democratic Action.

"His performance as a legislator speaks for itself also. He passionately upheld the welfare and rights of women and youth, which endeared him to many. His long bout with cancer did not deter him from continuing his advocacies," he said.

Although he enjoyed considerable support among the youth and students, his campaign did not have the widespread machinery of those of Arroyo and other candidates.

Roco's electoral foray was further hampered by his ill-health which forced him to curtail his campaigning.

After the election, Roco was a critic of the Arroyo administration but his illness largely kept him out of the spotlight.

He is survived by a wife, six children, and four grandchildren.

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Slowing RATE

Inquirer News Service

AFTER PROVING itself effective for three months, the Run After Tax Evaders (RATE) program of the government appears on its way to a shelf or, maybe, a graveyard. The irony is that the people who are taking it there are not the ones who are threatened by it but those who are duty-bound to ensure its success.

This much we can discern from the recent flurry of statements coming from no less than the leading members of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's new economic team. Which makes it even more intriguing.

At the peak implementation of RATE -- from the week after it was launched in March and up to June -- the nation saw an invigorated Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) filing at least two tax evasion cases every week against prominent personalities and big business establishments in an effort to drive up tax collections. Indeed, the government itself touted RATE for its role in significantly improving the BIR's collection during that period.

Thus, it's rather strange that BIR Deputy Commissioner Jose Mario Buñag, who has been less than a month in his post as interim head of the BIR, the agency primarily tasked with implementing RATE, has on several occasions indicated that he prefers to go back to the old practice of allowing tax evaders to settle deficiencies in their tax payments as a first option, instead of prosecuting them for tax evasion.

Veteran BIR officials say that "compromise settlements" never significantly raised tax collections. Worse, they promoted "a culture of tax evasion."

And even before this backsliding to a failed practice has been clearly adopted as official policy, the BIR proceeded to translate Buñag's preference into action. According to a recent Inquirer special report, the agency last week "declined to file a case against an unnamed tax evasion suspect." This move -- or "non-move," if you will -- is rather surprising: first, because it definitely veers away from RATE; and second, because it seems to follow the call of Trade and Industry Secretary Peter Favila, another new member of Ms Arroyo's economic team, to go soft in reporting on people facing tax evasion charges. This gives the impression that the government is now implementing a policy of leniency for tax cheats, even if the policy has yet to be declared officially.

Finance Secretary Margarito Teves, Buñag's immediate boss, buttressed this impression by saying that the weekly filing of criminal cases against tax evaders will no longer be a matter of course. He justified this decision as a move to ensure the quality of cases filed-as against RATE's seeming focus on quantity-and not a sign that the government is wavering on its tax drive. If that is the case, then RATE or the filing of tax evasion cases for that matter, may in effect be "dead in the water," as some BIR officials put it.

Of the 27 complaints filed under RATE since March, only one has been submitted to the Court of Tax Appeals for resolution. Finance officials blame the justice department for not acting on the cases. The justice department, for its part, is blaming finance officials for their lack of experience in criminal prosecution and proceedings. Chief State Prosecutor Jovencito Zuño noted that the BIR files cases without sufficient evidence. While BIR officials admit their inexperience with criminal cases, BIR Deputy Commissioner Kim Henares says it's not all their fault. "DOJ doesn't have any idea about tax laws," she countered.

If this pointless bickering between the two agencies is allowed to go on, then the new finance chief will surely never get the "quality cases" he wants. Meaning, RATE is done with.

And yet, this problem between the BIR and the DOJ is not really insurmountable. It is just a matter of forging a closer partnership, closer coordination and closer cooperation of complementing each other; of one filling what the other lacks; of pointing out what one must do to make the other more effective in the arena of battle. Unfortunately, instead of threshing out the kinks, the officials of these two crucial agencies are throwing stones at each other, if not making excuses for their inaction.

Meanwhile, RATE is fast losing the "fear factor" on which it was anchored. It is increasingly becoming impotent against suspected tax evaders, like Richard Gomez, Jose Ignacio Arroyo, Rodolfo Pineda and many other rich and influential individuals and firms.

One wonders if the emasculation of RATE is intended or if our cash-strapped and crises-laden government is still interested in seeing it succeed.

Special report: Drive vs tax evaders starts to weaken (Aug. 1, 2005)

Special report: Slow progress on tax cases frustrates RATE proponents (Aug. 2, 2005)

Special report: With RATE in decline, BIR seen reverting to tax deals (Aug. 3, 2005)

Glo's Threat

Commentary:
The President is the Biggest Threat to Military Discipline
By Jose de la Cruz
NEWSBREAK Contributing Writer

All eyes are on the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) again as the country goes through yet another political crisis. The AFP leadership has declared its neutrality in the present situation. But this assumes one thing: that the organization is disciplined enough to abide by this pronouncement.

But discipline in the military has deteriorated rather than improved. Although incidents indicating lack of discipline among Filipino troops have been documented throughout history, the extent of the breakdown of discipline that characterizes today's armed forces has no equal. It is systemic, and not just limited to a few recalcitrant individuals.

When I say this, I mean that indiscipline and its manifestations, including graft and corruption, flow from the top down. This becomes inevitable because the AFP is a rigidly centralized, top-down organization. If the leadership itself manifests indiscipline and corruption, then the subordinate echelons will eventually echo such manifestations. Worse, subordinates under these conditions will not only replicate the dysfunctional behavior of their superiors; they will feel less guilty about the whole process.

Ultimately, this process, which legitimizes dysfunctional behavior and materially benefits both superior and subordinate, infects the entire organization or large portions of it.

The magnitude of indiscipline in the military today is mind-boggling. Gross violations of military discipline are committed by no less than the highest-ranking leaders of the AFP. We witnessed this under the leadership of then AFP chief of staff Gen. Fabian Ver under the Marcos regime, but there are now more examples that have been widely reported in the media.

If a unit is led by a professional and honorable officer who is true to his oath, that unit is likely to behave in a manner reflective of the values and character of its leader. If a leader demands blind loyalty, his men will more than likely manifest an uncaring attitude to anything or anyone other than their rigid obedience to the commander's wishes. Since it is the officer corps that sets the tone for the whole organization, it is no wonder that the extent of indiscipline has reached this far.

The victims of the generals' betrayal of core values are the members of the profession who continue to be honorable despite their seniors. In the end, who suffers? The masses whose only guilt is in trusting the leadership of the men and women in uniform to be honorable when in truth they are not.

This brings us to the current political crisis, which challenges the very survival of the concept of discipline following grave accusations that the commander in chief herself violated it along with her sacred oath.

The scandals that question presidential credibility and legitimacy illustrate the gravest form of indiscipline, making the presidency the number one threat to military discipline throughout the armed forces. For how can the AFP continue to obey a leader whose credibility is clearly put in doubt by tapes alleging stolen legitimacy from the last national elections?

Ah, but the tapes are mere allegations and illegally acquired! Notwithstanding that, the AFP is a very sensitive institution where even mere allegations are enough to hasten the loss of allegiance from subordinates. Moreover, soldiers, like many citizens, are able to discern between the more significant nature of the tapes' content than mere technicalities upon which to base their "intelligent and reasoned obedience."

Another illustration hindering leadership-inspired military discipline in the AFP is the President's toleration of the alleged involvement of generals in the 2004 vote-rigging scandal. It is but logical for junior officers to question the President's appointment of the incoming Army chief, Maj. Gen. Hermogenes Esperon Jr., whose name is among those suspiciously implicated by the controversial "Hello Garci" tapes. Former National Security Adviser Roilo Golez sums up the implication of presidential indiscipline in the current crisis when he said that the President "no longer occupies the moral high ground. How can she discipline the military?"

Even before the tapes were leaked, the AFP had been the recipient of repeated presidential indiscipline. There are a number of such instances with varying effects. First, the President's "revolving door" policy in appointing AFP chiefs of staff has only served to heighten the politicization of the military, exacerbating the breakdown of discipline in the AFP ranks.

The wider distribution of political spoils among administration generals may have been meant to extinguish any potential threat coming from the military sector, but this practice eventually weakened the AFP as an institution. It jeopardized long-held traditions of discipline in the military. The President's "revolving door" policy only managed to encourage graft and corruption and the practice of patronage politics at the highest levels of the AFP.

The dysfunctional policy also violates with impunity the fundamental principles of organization and management, and this has made the AFP in a constant state of flux and turbulence.

Second, unwieldy presidential interference in military traditions has exacerbated the deterioration of discipline and morale in the AFP. For instance, presidential interference in awarding the medal for valor to officers whose exploits did not meet the criteria for the award has politicized the giving out of this highest military decoration, thereby dividing the AFP and sowing intrigue in its ranks.

It is therefore the height of hypocrisy to demand discipline from among the ranks of the AFP while the leadership led by the commander in chief follows a different set of military discipline—one that is self-serving.

The author, who used a pseudonym for this essay, is a member of the Armed Forces of the Philippines.

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Surprises

Inquirer News Service

WHAT'S the pro-administration majority in the House of Representatives really up to? Since the controversy over the "Hello, Garci" tapes broke out, the majority congressmen have been pulling one big surprise after another, starting with their decision to allow the playing of the tapes after initially objecting vigorously to it on the grounds that it would violate the Anti-Wire Tapping Law. Now they have agreed with the minority to adopt the same rules used in the impeachment of President Joseph Estrada in 2000.

Deputy Majority Leader Edcel Lagman, the principal sponsor of the draft rules on impeachment, said the members of the majority decided to adopt the old rules to disprove opposition claims that they would rig the rules to favor President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. He said the majority decision was also meant to end the debate over the rules and thus speed up deliberations on the impeachment complaint by the committee on justice.

If that is all there is to it, then there may be hope that the impeachment process will take its natural course instead of being aborted for one reason or another. Still some people find it hard to quash the queasy feeling that administration allies are taking one step backward to advance two steps forward or, better yet, they are abandoning the smaller battles so they can win the real war.

In the skirmish over the rules, the opposition can hardly claim complete victory. Opposition congressmen didn't get any assurance from the majority that once they have gathered the required number of votes -- one-third of the House membership, or 79 -- the impeachment complaint will be automatically transmitted to the Senate. On the contrary, administration congressmen are saying the complaint will have to be heard by the committee on justice, which will determine whether it is "sufficient in form and substance" and then submit a report to the whole House, where the complaint can be voted upon. The committee has all of 60 session days (or about three months) to act on the complaint, hardly the kind of timetable that promises a speedy resolution of the crisis now engulfing the nation.

It would appear that the opposition was forced to make a tactical retreat for the simple reason that it didn't have the necessary number of votes to shortcut the process. But once it wins 79 House members to its side, the move to send the complaint immediately to the Senate should be revived. Since two-thirds of the whole House membership can overturn the committee's recommendation, continuing the hearings would serve no other purpose but to delay the process.

In the meantime, the opposition should seize upon the hearings as an opportunity to convince both its colleagues (as well as the public) that it has a preponderance of evidence to prove its allegations and that it deserves their support. It is not a hopeless endeavor, no matter the superiority of numbers the majority now enjoys. Las Piñas City Rep. Cynthia Villar, a member of the Nacionalista Party as well as a member of the majority coalition, says that a number of her colleagues are searching their souls and are likely to vote according to their conscience. Speaker Jose de Venecia, despite exuding confidence that Ms Arroyo can hold the loyalty of the majority, has said the same thing: congressmen will vote on the basis of their conscience.

The nation expects nothing less. Our people will be watching the proceedings very closely, and they will know if their representatives are playing blind to the evidence, deaf to the testimony and dumb to clear arguments. As in the past, the last thing they will want is to see the truth suppressed and lawmakers making decisions out of blind loyalty to the President or their party.

More Zuce

Posted by Yvonne Chua 
PCIJ

PRESIDENT Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo allegedly met Commission on Elections (Comelec) field officials not once, but twice, at her home in La Vista, Quezon City in January of 2004. On both occasions, the president asked for the support of Comelec officials for her candidacy.

And, in the first of those meetings, it was "impossible" for the President not to have seen Lubao, Pampanga Mayor Lilia Pineda, wife of jueteng lord Bong Pineda, hand over to a Comelec official a brown envelope filled with small white envelopes, each containing P30,000-bribe money for the election officials who had been invited to the presidential home.

All these were disclosed today to PCIJ and ABS-CBN by former presidential staff officer Michaelangelo "Louie" Zuce, a nephew of controversial ex-Comelec Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano. The Malacañang staffer went public Monday with charges that the Arroyo administration had bribed election officials to support the president's candidacy in last year's elections.

Zuce, who was present in both meetings, made no reference to the second dinner at the Arroyo residence in his Aug. 1 sworn statement . He also clarified that while his earlier statement did say that the white envelopes containing the cash were distributed when the president was no longer around, the bigger envelope stuffed with smaller envelopes of cash was given out in Mrs. Arroyo's presence.

Zuce explained that although he was indeed a "minor functionary," as Palace spokesmen asserted, his kinship with Garcillano and the trust his uncle gave him made him privy to confidential matters, including the meetings with the president and the arrangements with Comelec personnel. He was a trusted gofer, someone who could be relied on to arrange meeting sites, deliver and distribute cash, and other logistical requirements.

The former Palace staffmember recounted details of a second meeting arranged for a number of Comelec field officials, especially from the Visayas, who had failed to make it to the first one. A few officials from Mindanao who were in the first meeting were also in the second group, he said.

There were less than 20 Comelec officials in the second dinner, compared to the 27 (all of them from Mindanao) in the first, according to Zuce. All of them, including Zuce himself, received the P30,000-handout from Mrs. Pineda.

Unlike in the first meeting, Garcillano and former Isabela Gov. Faustino Dy Jr. were not present at the dinner that Arroyo hosted for the second group of Comelec officials. Only the president and Mrs. Pineda were there.

Comelec personnel also did not ask for photocopiers or vehicles like their colleagues did the first time. But as the group was making its way to the main door, Pineda handed Comelec Region 4 Director Juanito "Johnny" Icaro a brown envelope.

Back in the vehicle, Icaro took out from the brown envelope filled with small white envelopes, each containing P30,000, and distributed these to his colleagues. "Nakatanggap ako uli (I got one again)," Zuce said.

That second meeting was rather memorable for Zuce because, he said, they were served "pansit na kulay violet (violet-colored noodles)." He said the Comelec officials found it a strange dish.

Zuce, 30, a native of Bukidnon who is related to Garcillano by marriage, said he was not certain if the president noticed Pineda handing the envelope to Icaro during the second meeting.

But in the first meeting, Arroyo was with them going up the stairs when Icaro took the envelope from Pineda. "Kasabay namin lumabas si Ma'am. It was impossible for her not to see it," he said. He added there was no reaction from the president.

Zuce recalled thanking the president for appointing Garcillano during the first meeting at La Vista.

Reacting to charges that bribe money was given out during a meeting at her home before the elections, the president earlier told ABC-5, "Ang masasabi ko walang nagbibigay ng suhol sa harap ko (All I can say is no one gives out bribes in front of me)."

This morning, Romulo Makalintal, her lawyer in the last elections, said in a radio interview that nowhere in Zuce's statement does he say the president witnessed money changing hands.

So far, though, there has been no categorical denial from the Palace and Mrs. Arroyo's supporters that such a meeting took place at her La Vista residence.

The interview with Zuce took place at a location we were told not to disclose. All the journalists present there were driven around Metro Manila for over an hour before finally being taken to the interview site. After the interview, Zuce was whisked away by the security men assigned to him. Only then were the journalists allowed to leave.

During the interview, Zuce described the president's house as old but clean. The entrance led to a corridor. The receiving area was one level down. The meeting was held at a lower level which opened out to the pool. Zuce said his group spent two hours smoking and killing time near the pool until the president arrived at 9 p.m.

Asked whether the president meant that the officials should help protect her vote or make sure she won the election, Zuce said, "Nandun na lahat. Comelec ang kaharap mo, e (She meant all of those. She was talking to Comelec officials)."

Zuce barely knew Pineda then but immediately got the impression that she was very close to the president. Seated at the head of the table during that first meeting were Dy, the President, Pineda and then Garcillano.

"May binubulong si Mrs. Pineda kay Ma'am (Baby was whispering something to GMA)," he said. It seemed like they've been friends for a long time, he added.

Zuce said the president immediately called someone on the phone when the Comelec officials in Mindanao asked for photocopiers and then passed her phone to Francisco Pobe, Agusan del Sur provincial election supervisor.

It was Pineda who volunteered to take care of the request of the election officials for vehicles. Zuce said Toyota Delicas were considered but were found insufficient. It was then agreed that the Philippine Amusement and Gaming Corp. or Pagcor would send the vehicles, he said.

In his statement, Zuce said a breakfast meeting between Garcillano and Pagcor Chair Ephraim Genuino at the Makati Shangrila Hotel did not push through. Genuino was late and Garcillano, who was upset at the Pagcor chair's tardiness, had to rush off to a Comelec en banc meeting.

Zuce, a native of Bukidnon, said he has been a Lakas member since 1994 when he joined its youth arm as a volunteer. He was to transfer later to the National Youth Commission but returned to the party years later. He also joined Lakas' Muslim Christian Democrats, particularly the Erap Resign Movement.

After EDSA 2, Jose Ma. A. Rufino, presidential liaison officer for political affairs, asked him to work in Malacañang. Zuce said he has known Rufino even before the Erap Resign Movement.

Zuce admits he is "an ordinary staff" but said his work allowed him to get to know a lot of politicians, especially during electoral campaigns, because Rufino's office attended to their needs.

He said he also helped in the elections of leagues, referring to the organizations of governors, mayors and other public officials. He added he was often sent to Comelec to get electoral data.

Zuce said he introduced Garcillano to Rufino because his uncle had dreamt of becoming a Comelec commissioner since the time of President Fidel Ramos.

Enjoying his uncle's trust, Zuce said he became the "link" between the elections commissioner and Rufino for the 2004 elections.

Garcillano took him along to meetings, including those with the Pinedas, while Zuce helped arrange the consultations meetings with Comelec field personnel. That, he said, explained Rufino's absence in some of the meetings. "Rufino didn't have to be there because I was there," he said.

Reacting to Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos's statement that the attendance sheet he had annexed to his statement was the list of Comelec officials who attended the Comelec sportsfest in Lanao del Norte, Zuce pointed out the consultations meetings in Mindanao and in Metro Manila were precisely timed with
official activities when elections personnel would have their travel orders.

Zuce said he had no intention of coming out in the open when he quit his job last May, but changed his mind when he began receiving threats and got word that former police chief and now public works secretary Hermogenes Ebdane has been looking for him since the "Hello, Garci" controversy broke. He said he doesn't know Ebdane and feared for his and his family's safety.

Zuce said he has lost touch with Garcillano since Gloriagate. "Hawak nila. Sila ang nagpaalis doon (He's in their control; they made him leave)," he said.

But he expressed the hope that his uncle would eventually come out of hiding. "Sana ilabas niya ang katotohohan (I hope he tells the truth)," he says.

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : The key?

Inquirer News Service

INCREDIBLE and implausible. That's what the Palace says of the testimony of Michaelangelo Zuce. President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo herself has dismissed his testimony as the kind that's … la carte, meaning basically for sale.

But that's precisely why the testimony seems so engaging: if it has been scripted, it's better written than what's been peddled so far. And if it's for sale, then it may have enough truth to it, to be a hot property indeed.

With the low level of credibility all sides suffer from, the latest in a series of whistle-blowers paraded (or soon to be paraded) before Congress has one thing going for him: a proliferation of allegations that can be easily subjected to verification. Zuce has provided an interminable list of names, numbers, events and locations, all of which should lead to other witnesses who can verify-or demolish-his testimony. While Malacañang naturally wants to emphasize the witness' lack of importance in the political scheme of things, it can't avoid the fact that he once merited employment in a politically sensitive office. Neither can it avoid being put in the uncomfortable position of hearing the testimony of someone who at least has enough knowledge to come up with a tale that includes the President herself as a character, however the tale has been embroidered.

Malacañang ought to be very careful about impugning the testimony of Zuce, simply on the basis of his having been a low-level operative or even a flunky. Our class-conscious society suffers from the delusion, common among the powerful, that their flunkies don't think and thus don't realize the full importance of what their employers do and say in front of them. Reporters routinely resort to interviewing waiters, janitors and household help to verify the movements and actions of people in the news. There is no reason a low-ranking fly (admittedly, a pretty big and not very inspiring one) wouldn't have information damaging to his former superiors.

Unlike Ador Mawanay, who was easily proven to be a liar, or Sandra Cam, who has been easily proven to have the goods on retired Police Chief Supt. Restituto Mosqueda but no one else, except through hearsay, this new witness has made allegations that can be subjected to verification, at least on a circumstantial basis, on many levels. Reporters and other journalists have been feasting on Zuce's testimony precisely because his stories can be subjected to verification-and, conversely, be debunked-in many instances. What is interesting, in fact, about Zuce's allegations is that it's marked throughout by the pedestrian nature of the corruption he claims to have taken place, and in which he participated. In contrast to Cam's exaggerated claims involving millions of pesos in bribe money, Zuce speaks of "gifts" in the range of tens of thousands of pesos: it is more believable that a person as piddling as the Palace says Zuce is would only have handled, and known of, relatively small sums. There is, after all, a hierarchy even among political crooks.

Certainly, by his own testimony, Zuce was a petty political crook, and undertook apparently unsavory tasks. Administration officials even say he wasn't a particularly hard worker, and didn't seem worth keeping on the payroll. Even his co-workers seem to have a low opinion of him. He is the kind of big-talking, wheeling-and-dealing posturer whose usefulness is so short-lived as to make it undesirable to keep giving him crumbs.

But all this doesn't mean he didn't see or hear something. It also means, that alone among the witnesses who have come forward so far, he is the only one the Palace can't deny as having come from within its fold. Thus, if he is such a disgraceful individual, it doesn't speak highly of his employers that they once found him worthy of being paid out of the public purse.

In the end, Zuce's testimony particularly in the impeachment trial, if it should come to that, will speak for itself. Either it will be proven to be a series of weak links, or links that make the chain stronger. After all the noise, this seems to be the only testimony that shows the potential of truly causing sleepless nights in the Palace.

Operation Gloria

By Aries Rufo
Newsbreak Senior Writer

MILITARY officers cheated for President Arroyo in Sulu, employing persuasion, intimidation, and bribery, two officials of the Commission on Elections (Comelec) have told NEWSBREAK.

One of the two poll officials is willing to testify before any probe body. NEWSBREAK is withholding their identities pending their appearance in an official investigation into the so-called "Garci" tapes. One of them, based in the Comelec's main office in Manila, helped supervise the elections in Sulu in May 2004.The two sources identified the military officers involved but, for fear of reprisal, requested anonymity. It was the first time the two sources talked to the media.

On May 4 that year, or six days before the elections, the Manila-based election official was invited by a senior general to a hotel in Zamboanga City. In the hotel, the election official saw a number of military officers and concluded that this was not going to be one of the regular meetings with Comelec deputies (the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police serve as Comelec deputies during elections).

The source decided to leave the hotel but was approached by a junior officer, who told the former about the agenda: to ensure the President's victory. The source quoted the officer as saying: "We have orders from higher ups. We have to make her [Arroyo] win."

The junior officer referred to the plan as "Operation Gloria," which sought to have the votes apportioned at 70-20-10 in favor of Ms. Arroyo. The officer reportedly explained: "70 percent of the votes would go to the President, 20 percent to FPJ [Fernando Poe Jr.], and 10 percent to [Panfilo] Lacson."

The election official refused to take part in the operation. Undaunted, the young military officer sought permission to "use the election officers in Sulu." Not wanting to incur the military's ire, the source recalled telling the officer: "Do what you have to do, but I cannot help you. If you want, go to the precinct level. I am only going to read what's on the municipal certificate of canvass."

We contacted an election officer based in Sulu to check if the military participated in vote rigging in the province. The election officer agreed to talk to us on condition of anonymity. She said she had been traumatized by her experience with the military.

An Officer's Bribe
She confirmed that during the elections, she received P50,000 from an Army captain. She said she accepted the money out of fear. But after consulting her superior, she decided to return it by getting from the captain his bank account details and depositing it there.

"I was crying during the canvassing because the military wanted me to tamper with the elections," the election officer told NEWSBREAK in a phone interview. "They said the President must win. I was shivering and I wanted to get out of the canvass area. The pressure was too much," the source said in Filipino. Canvassing for the municipal and provincial results was held inside Camp Gen. Teodulfo Bautista in Jolo.

We sought out these two election officers to check information revealed in the "Garci" tapes, supposedly containing wiretapped conversations between President Arroyo and Elections Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano. In one portion of the recording, Garcillano talked about the military's participation in what appears to be a cheating operation for the President.

In a phone conversation on May 29, 2004, a woman who sounded like the President expressed concern that the opposition was threatening to expose cheating in a particular area. The woman told Garcillano that the opposition appeared to have secured affidavits in which teachers and the board of canvassers stated that they were made to cheat. In that conversation, Garcillano blamed one General Habacon for the problem, implying that he had messed up the job.

In a June 2 conversation with someone who sounded like the President, Garcillano again blamed the military for the reported foul-up in Basilan and Lanao del Sur. "Alam nyo naman ang mga military, dun e, hindi masyadong marunong kasi silang gumawa. Katulad dun sa Sulu (You know the military there [in Basilan and Lanao del Sur], they're not that good unlike those in Sulu)." Garcillano told the woman.

NEWSBREAK mistakenly reported in its July 18 issue that Maj. Gen. Gabriel Habacon was at the time the commander of the Army's first infantry division, which had jurisdiction over Sulu, Basilan, and the Zamboanga Peninsula. During the elections, Habacon was only in charge of Sulu, as commander of Joint Task Force Comet, which has military jurisdiction over the whole island province. The first-division commander then was Maj. Gen. Trifonio Salazar, now retired.

Habacon denied insinuations that he could have been a party to poll cheating. "I have never been involved in any fraudulent acts," he said. Habacon is at present the commander of the first infantry division. When asked to comment on "Operation Gloria," he said: "I have never heard of that kind of animal except now that you asked me."

Delayed Canvass
While the President won in Sulu, it was a tight race, with her getting 78,429 votes over Fernando Poe Jr.'s 60,807. (In the five provinces composing the Autonomous Region in Muslim Mindanao, where Poe was concededly popular, it was only in Tawi-tawi that he won—49,803 votes against Arroyo's 33,634.)

The two Comelec sources privy to the Sulu operation told NEWSBREAK that Poe could have easily beaten Arroyo in the province if not for the military's hand in cheating.

According to the Manila-based source, municipal election officers in Sulu were offered by military officers between P50,000 and P150,000 to tamper with the results. To the Sulu-based source, this was the first time that the military "played with the results" of the elections in that province.

Unable to take the pressure, the election officer said she "walked out" of the canvassing and went into hiding in Zamboanga City. She was luckier than another election officer, Cipriano Ebron, who, if the wiretapped conversations are to be believed, was forced to go into hiding after soldiers got angry with him for his crude tampering with election documents in the town of Panguntaran.

A check with Comelec showed that the Panguntaran certificate of canvass (COC) had been tampered with. In the COC, President Arroyo got 8,716 votes (in Arabic numerals), but obviously her actual votes, written in words, totaled only 716. Poe's votes were reduced to 252 (Arabic numerals) when his votes in words were 4,253.

The Manila-based source said that the cheating was most apparent in the municipalities that were late in submitting their canvass results.

Minutes of the Sulu board of canvassers show that in the towns that submitted late canvass results, Arroyo won by a landslide. These are Siasi, Talipao, and Indanan. In Siasi, Arroyo got 9,231 votes against Poe's 640 while in Talipao, Arroyo got 7,498 versus Poe's 3,710. In Indanan, Arroyo got 11,254 while Poe got 6,280.

A General's Plea
The source recalled that when belated results still showed a close fight between Ms. Arroyo and Poe, a military general approached her during the provincial canvassing and asked "Wala na bang magagawa? (Can nothing else be done?)" The source said she told him it was too late to further change the results.

Former ARMM regional election director Helen Aguila Flores acknowledged that there were problems in Sulu. Flores was relieved from her post on May 6, 2004, four days before the elections, for still unclear reasons. She told NEWSBREAK that before this, she had verbal clashes with Habacon regarding the clustering of precincts in the province.

Flores said she was hoping that the clustering system in the 2001 senatorial race would be followed in the 2004 polls because the previous one worked well. But Habacon reportedly would hear none of it. "He wanted to reduce the number of polling places and my concern then was to avoid disenfranchising the voters and avoid a situation where warring groups would meet in one polling center," Flores explained.

The old cluster put the second district of Sulu under the jurisdiction of the Marines, but Flores said Habacon wanted this area placed under the Army. She also said that one of her election officers in Panamao town, Shameer Abdulcadil, had been abducted and was missing for two days during the election period. "Abdulcadil reported the incident to me and he recalled that it was an Army jeep that was used in abducting him," Flores said.

Habacon denied that his unit had harassed election personnel in the province.

All the complaints of election officers in Sulu reached the Comelec's main office. The Manila-based source said that she met with Garcillano at the main office and told him about the problems in Sulu.

Of course, the "Hello, Garci" tapes hadn't come out yet at that time.

—With reports from Julie S. Alipala in Zamboanga City

Send us your feedback: letters@newsbreak.com.ph

Mercado's Column

Viewpoint : Burying a Guinness record holder

Juan Mercado
Inquirer News Service

"WHAT'S wrong with burying a Guinness Book of Records holder in a heroes' cemetery?" the editor joked at a newsroom session on a trial balloon that fizzled.

That blimp hinted that the President was open to burial of Ferdinand Marcos at Libingan ng mga Bayani [Cemetery of Heroes]. Ms Arroyo quickly denied the yarn saying, "All I want is to heal the wounds of Edsa I, II and III."

But telltale reactions surfaced quickly. That's a wrongfully withheld honor, claimed Imelda and Ilocos Norte Gov. Ferdinand Marcos Jr. Former President Joseph Estrada said Marcos was a "hero" and he deserves to be interred in Libingan.

Estrada's standards were always less than heroic. Thus, he never saw the point that Inquirer columnist Isagani Cruz made in "That queasy feeling": Libingan is not another memorial park. "None but heroes lie" there.

This value is reflected in shrines abroad, from Gettysburg and Arlington Cemeteries in the United States to Singapore's Krangji memorial. Commonwealth countries have 200 such memorials. Their theme resonates in the Kohima Battle memorial plaque: "When You Go Home, Tell Them And Say, / For Their Tomorrow, We Gave Our Today."

"Estrada backtracked when people angrily protested his plan to inter Marcos in Libingan, even before he assumed the presidency," Isagani Cruz recalled in his January 1999 column.

Estrada stomped on a value shared by peoples everywhere: that heroes' resting places are hallowed grounds. Dictatorship and kleptocracy, however, fracture that value. Thus, Marcos' track record blocks a Libingan burial.

Despite denials, the Marcoses cast about for a state funeral. It would honor their dead -- and rehabilitate the living still shackled to a sordid past. Hence, they've refrigerated the strongman's corpse, for over 18 years now -- just in case.

Libingan's caretaker today is a President fighting to survive. Will the undertaker swap a horse-drawn caisson for political support? That would stomp on deeply held values. Look at the track record.

Fact: On June 5, 1997, the Supreme Court confirmed that "no estate taxes were filed by the Marcos spouses for 1982 to 1986." Neither did they submit income tax returns from 1982 to 1985. Marcos' tax deficiency totaled P23,293,607,638 -- not including Ferdinand Jr.'s P18.5-million debt. Reconsideration appeals were "denied with finality" on Jan. 13, 1997.

Fact: In 1986, The New York Times published a series, written by Seymour Hersh, revealing that US National Archives and US Army records discredited Marcos' claims to heroism in World War II, debunking those war medals.

Follow-up articles by Jeff Gerth and Joel Brinkley revealed that the US Army concluded that services given by Marcos and 23 others to the 1st Cavalry Division were "of limited military value."

"At no time did the Army recognize that any unit, designating itself as Maharlika, ever existed as a guerrilla force in the years of Japanese occupation," the Times said. "The immensity of Mr. Marcos' claim that Maharlika served the entire Luzon was absurd," the reviewing officer, Capt. Elbert Curtis, wrote. Marcos' claims were dismissed with finality in 1948.

Fact: Under the "New Society," the Philippines was "transformed from a country with a remarkable constitutional tradition to a system where star-chamber methods were used, on so wide a scale as to literally torture evidence into existence," Amnesty International reported.

Fact: "Under Marcos, military murder was the apex of a pyramid of terror -- 3,257 killed, 35,000 tortured and 70,000 incarcerated," Prof. Alfred McCoy told an Ateneo-Wisconsin University conference. Instead of an invisible machine like Argentina's, the Marcos regime intimidated by random displays of its torture victims -- becoming thereby a theater of state terror. "Beneath the surface of a restored democracy, impunity, culture and politics are recasting cronies into statesmen, torturers into legislators and killers into generals… The trauma of Marcos' terror remains deeply embedded in society's collective memory and institutional fabric."

Fact: For over a decade, the Guinness Book of Records featured the Marcoses in its section on "Crime." One edition brackets the salting away of $860.8 million between the theft of the Mona Lisa painting in 1911 and the robbery of Germany's Reichbank in 1945. Later, the crime ranked with entries for deposed dictators like Africa's Mobutu Seseke.

Real heroes, like Lorenzo Tañada, Joaquin Roces, Jose Diokno and Benigno Aquino, among others, deserve a Libingan grave. But neither they nor their families demanded that honor. They understood that integrity and nobility of spirit -- not honor guards -- consecrate a burial ground in truth. Horse-drawn hearses cannot redress poverty of the spirit. "El sitio nada importa" ["Where is of no import"], Jose Rizal writes in "Mi Ultimo Adios."

In an open letter to then President Estrada, Victoria Mansueto (an aunt now dead) wrote:

"When World War II started, my younger brother was a fighter pilot. Lt. Salvador Manlunas and others fought in obsolete P-26 planes against modern Japanese Zeroes. He was killed in action.

"Bading never had a Swiss bank account. Nor did he own vast lands. All he has is a quiet tree-lined street, named after him, in Villamor Air Base and a Libingan grave. Now, you'd bury next to him, as a hero, someone whom the Guinness Book of Records credits for massive theft."

(E-mail: juan_mercado@pacific.net.ph)

Bernas' Column

Sounding Board : Let's get it over with

Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.
Inquirer News Service

THE JOKE has been going around that Speaker Jose de Venecia landed in St. Luke's Hospital with bleeding hands from too much vigorous clapping during the last Sona of President Macapagal-Arroyo. He and former President Fidel Ramos are the principal cheer leaders in Ms Arroyo's campaign for constitutional revision. And they want it done through Congress acting as a constituent assembly.

If they really want to, they can start it today. The constituent assembly enthusiasts will find the 1987 Constitution helpful for getting started. But completing the work will be something else.

Under the 1935 Constitution, before Congress could act as a constituent assembly, the two houses had to agree first to meet in joint session. The text of the 1935 Constitution read thus: "The Congress in joint session assembled, by a vote of three-fourths of all the Members of the Senate and of the House of Representatives voting separately may propose amendments to this Constitution . . ." Clearly, under the 1935 Constitution, before Congress could consider constitutional amendments, the two houses had to approve first a resolution convening Congress to a joint session for the purpose.

The language of the 1987 Constitution is different. It simply says: "Any amendment to, or revision of, this Constitution may be proposed by: (1) the Congress, upon a vote of three-fourths of all its Members . . ." There is nothing there about having to come together in joint session. My reading of the present text is that, even without a resolution converting Congress into a constituent assembly, Congress, as is, can already consider amendments to the Constitution. The present text, without more, already makes Congress a constituent assembly.

From this it follows that, if any member of the House or of the Senate wishes to propose changes in the Constitution, all he or she has to do is formulate them, submit them to the House where he or she belongs, and, if after being reported out for debate they are approved by a vote of three-fourths of all the members, it is next passed on to the other house for action. If both houses approve the same changes, then they are ripe for ratification in a plebiscite.

The preliminary step of convening a constituent assembly is no longer necessary under the present dispensation (although it may still be used if both houses agree to a joint session). The present text simply says that Congress, a bicameral body, may propose amendments by a vote of three-fourths of all its members. The two houses can already do this as they are and where they are. The two houses as they are and where they are already have constituent powers given to them by the Constitution.

If Speaker De Venecia or any other member of the House is passionately set on setting in motion the process of amending or revising the present Constitution, let him or her formulate the changes desired and submit them for action by the House of Representatives. This way, what President Arroyo calls "the great debate" can begin in earnest and not just in press releases.

I therefore urge the advocates of constitutional change to let the world know what form of parliamentarism and federalism they want. They have the right to do so and no one should begrudge them that right. Which does not mean that they will get what they want.

If they will do this, we will finally see if, indeed, they can get the support of three-fourths of all the members of the House. That should mean something like 177 votes in favor. If they do not get that support from the House, we can breathe a sigh of relief, and Congress can go on to more urgent business. And if they do get the needed votes, we will soon enough know how solid the Senate opposition really is. To kill any proposed amendment, all that is needed is for seven senators to vote against it. Present indications seem to be that unless there is a miraculous conversion in the thinking of senators, the lower House will not have its way.

We might recall that it was also during the month of August in 1997 that there was much agitation for constitutional revision. Word going around then was that it was being orchestrated by incumbent President Fidel Ramos. The hot objective then was the removal of the term limits on national elective officials. Now the flavors of the month are parliamentarism and federalism. We should soon enough see if these will sell.

Inquirer Editorial : Local motion

THE TWO-MONTH-OLD political crisis has driven home an almost-new, altogether vital lesson: The country's political map has been truly redrawn.

We mean this quite literally. Last Friday, we ran a "political map of support/non-support" on the front page, showing the Philippines awash in a sea of green.

Green was the color we assigned to provincial governors who voiced support for President Macapagal-Arroyo after the crisis erupted; the green provinces include the likes of Eastern Samar, headed by Gov. Ben Evardone, who did not campaign for the President last May but is now the spokesperson for the pro-Arroyo governors.

The fact that vote-rich provinces like Pangasinan and Batangas are now counted in the President's column, despite having broken for opposition candidate Fernando Poe Jr. last year, may strike us at first as yet another manifestation of turncoat politics. But we would be wrong.

The fact is, many local executives (last Friday's story also carried a tally of mayors for or against the President) have rushed in to defend the center because they believe the future of the new periphery is itself at stake. Call it the modern paradox of local power.

The spectacle of local executives pledging support to a President under siege is nothing new, of course; in the last days of the dictatorship, many governors and mayors sided with Ferdinand Marcos. The difference is, they had no real power apart from access to Malacañang.

Today, there is a real movement of political power to the provinces, set in motion in the last decade by possibly the most consequential single piece of legislation since the fall of the dictatorship: the Local Government Code.

The grant of real powers to local governments did not only give them access to a guaranteed income or allow them an unprecedented measure of control over their own affairs. It also encouraged local executives to dream of real autonomy from the center; more precisely, it allowed them to re-imagine the center.

To be sure, local executives continue to realize that it would be better to have an ally in the Palace (and by extension, in the budget department). Politics, after all, is still addition. But if we focus all our attention on this transactional relationship between Malacañang and the local governments, we would miss out on the real story.

Local governments have become a real source of power in their own right.

This is what we mean when we say the political map has truly been redrawn. The center holds in part because it is anchored on the periphery; that is what all those green-shaded political units in last Friday's map signify.

Many local executives do not only appreciate the political fact that the President literally speaks their language; they also recognize that Ms Arroyo is not a threat to them. In the black-and-white world of politics, she is on their side. The promise of greater devolution explicit in her campaign platform last year and implicit in her development plan is incentive enough to come to her defense. The idea that Metro Manila can once again mandate an interruption in the course of the country's political life only adds motive to incentive.

We wish to be clear: The "political map of support/non-support" is not a measure of public opinion. That would require another map altogether, showing, for instance, greater support for a federal system in Mindanao, greater support for the President in the Visayas, and greater support for impeachment in Metro Manila.

But the governors' map is telling in revealing ways. It shows us that the decision to invite local executives to the President's State of the Nation Address was not only meant to pack the Batasan with Charter change advocates but also an acknowledgment of their real power. And it signals to us that a hundred years after emerging local leaders like Sergio Osmeña from Cebu and Manuel Quezon from Tayabas contested Manila's dominance, there is a new vitality in the countryside.