opinion


AMBIENT VOICES


BIG DEAL


A 4


The Manila Times


FRIDAY


D e cember 10, 2010 Edit orial


Aquino 3rd’s high public satisfaction ratings. On Tuesday, the High Tribunal struck down Executive Order 1 as unconstitutional, for the Palace directive violates the Constitu- tion’s equal protection clause by focusing on the perceived “sins” of the Arroyo administration.


Frittering away goodwill T


HE Supreme Court decision to annul the Malacañang order creating the Truth Commission should jolt the Palace out of a complacency that seems to be born of President Benigno


Section 1 Article 3 of the Philippine Constitution states that no person should be denied equal protection of the law. Under EO 1, the Commission is tasked to investigate the reports about corruption that transpired during the nine-year term of former President—now Representative—Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Ten out of the 15 justices decided to nullify EO 1, while the remaining five voted in favor of the Palace order. Four out of the five dissenters were appointed to the High


Tribunal by Mrs. Arroyo. According to the dissenting opinion as penned by an Arroyo appointee, EO 1 is constitutional and does not preclude the government from investigating anomalies committed during earlier administrations. Immediately after news came out of the Supreme Court’s decision, the President went on live TV to deliver his reaction to the High Tribunal’s ruling.


Speaking in Filipino—and obviously addressing the disap- pointed masses—Mr. Aquino explained why his administration had opted to create the Truth Commission and not simply rely on the existing judicial institutions. According to him, institutions such as the Office of the Om- budsman and the Department of Justice (DOJ) are already weighed down by unresolved cases that would suffer further delays had Malacañang opted to tap them for the search for truth about the wrongdoings of the former administration. Basing his argument on his understanding of the Constitution,


Mr. Aquino also claimed that his predecessor was unlike previous presidents because she defied the six-year term limit imposed by law. Therefore, it was not wrong to treat her and her administra- tion as a class by themselves.


In making a case for the exceptional nature of his predecessor,


Mr. Aquino is apparently trying to establish historical parallels between his term and that of his late mother’s. President Corazon Cojuangco-Aquino, after succeeding then President Ferdinand Marcos, issued her Executive Order 1 to recover the ill-gotten wealth of the ousted dictator. The comparison, however, is severely stretched, betraying a will to disregard both context and detail.


Ours is not a revolutionary government One should not disregard the fact that for all its many faults,


the Arroyo administration’s record of excesses that made critics accuse it of massive graft and corruption, of violating the laws, of abusing human rights, of misusing the powers of the police and the military, etc. in no way comes close to that of the Marcos dictatorship. That is in fact why finally the Marcos regime ended by means of a military mutiny supported by the EDSA 1 People Power Revolt. The EDSA 1 Revolt—which some call a coup d’etat following the


mutiny of men in uniform loyal to then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile and Armed Forces Vice Chief of Staff Fidel V. Ramos—led to President Cory Aquino’s installation as the head of a revolutionary government. She had the powers of a revolutionary chief upon President Marcos’ removal. She had the authority to exercise the powers of the government’s executive and legislative branches—and could have also exercised judicial power if she was so minded. These powers, in regular times, should not have been concentrated in one person, President Corazon Aquino, but they were for that was an extraordinary period in our nation’s history. Immediately after her installation, President Cory Aquino issued Proclamation No. 3, which established a revolutionary govern- ment. She abolished the 1973 Constitution that was in force during martial law, and instead promulgated the provisional 1986 Freedom Constitution, pending the ratification of a new Constitu- tion by the people. She exercised both executive and legislative powers until the ratification of the new Philippine Constitution and the establishment of a new Congress in 1987. President Noynoy Aquino does not have such powers. He succeeded


Mrs. Arroyo through the constitutional means of an election. As such, Mr. Aquino enjoys only the powers of the executive


vested on him by the Constitution. A more prudent course would have been for him to have formed a task force consisting of different agencies, or one solely under the DOJ, to look into the reports and allegations of corruption and other forms of criminal conduct during the Arroyo administration. This would be par for the course as far as Justice Secretary Leila De Lima is concerned, since she enjoys the highest public satisfac- tion ratings among Mr. Aquino’s cabinet members. In any event, Mrs. De Lima is not one to shirk from such a challenge. A deeper problem with the Commission, however, is that, from


day one, the idea was very partisan, soiling its claim of being a vessel of purity to bring out the truth.


The Commission was an electoral campaign promise—and its origin weakened its foundation. Following the Supreme Court’s decision to nullify EO 1, the


Palace said it would file a motion for reconsideration—something that could have been announced with much less pomp and politically partisan gravity than in a live TV address to the nation by the President himself. Instead, Mr. Aquino chose the path of high-profile demagogu-


ery, which no doubt will even increase his popularity. The President, we believe, should have put the goodwill he enormously enjoys among us Filipinos to better use. Its so easy to fritter away goodwill, but very difficult to earn it. Urging the masses to see the Supreme Court as, in effect,


“enemies of the people” because it has thwarted his effort to make corruption vanish forever is a formula for the nation’s division— and eventual decline. Portraying the High Court as an unworthy “Arroyo dominated institution” does not make the President’s job to progress our nation easier.


FRIDAY December 10, 2010 The Manila Times DANTE F. M. ANG 2ND, Executive Editor


FRED DE LA ROSA, Chairman Editorial Board RENE Q. BAS, Editor in Chief ROMY P. MARIÑAS, News Editor


ARNOLD S. TENORIO, Business Editor CONRAD M. CARIÑO, National Editor


TESSA MAURICIO-ARRIOLA, Lifestyle Editor ARIS L. SOLIS, Regions Editor


PERRY GIL MALLARI, Acting Sports Editor BRIAN M. AFUANG, Art Director RENE H. DILAN, Photo Editor


 DANTE F. M. ANG 2ND, President and CEO


Telephone All Departments. 524-5665 to 67 Telefax 528-1729; Subscription: 524-5664 Local 222 URL http://www.manilatimes.net • e-mail newsboy1@manilatimes.net Letters to the editor


THE MANILA TIMES is published daily at 2/F Dante Ang and Associates Building, 409 A. Soriano Avenue, Intramuros, Manila 1002


VOLUME 112 NUMBER 060


HERE has to be serious reform at the NAIA, our Manila Inter- national Airport. The air of ad hoc organization it somehow dis- plays has to give way to responsi- ble and pragmatic management procedures that result in efficient service whether coming or going. It is always a mystery why this air- port seems to have so many on- lookers, kibitzers or whatever you call that population that seems to be there with no programmed tasks but to look at passengers as they go in or out, particularly ar- rivals. How many security person- nel does it need aside from its obvious uniformed contingent? Are all those standby’s really se- curity personnel in disguise? Furthermore, there has to be a definitive solution to the Immi- gration and Customs personnel overtime expenses issue. They should not be passed on to the airlines whose flights happen to arrive during “overtime” for which they are charged handsomely. Is it really true that even if there are simultaneous airline arrivals, each airline is charged the full cost of the overtime charges? That would be dishonest, un-business-like and wrong. Using an attitude of mendicancy or dependence to


T MA. ISABEL ONGPIN


solve what is clearly a singular problem of airport management by virtually blackmailing trans- port carriers speaks very poorly of our government.


The NAIA charges airport fees (one of the few airports in the world left doing this extraction) and yet tries to pass on overtime charges to the airlines on the ba- sis of mendicancy. If there are not enough personnel for Immigra- tion and Customs to have a night shift, then hire the necessary number, give jobs, train people and stop the mendicancy and act with self-reliance and self-respect. What is wrong at the airport is not necessarily the poor facili- ties though they play a part. It is the laidback attitude to how to do things. Instead of sourcing out the funds to enhance serv- ices, the path of least resistance is taken—pass the responsibility


Can’t trust NPA during the SOMO


THE spirit of Christmas is eve- rywhere, and most of us are busy preparing for Christmas parties, family reunions and even class reunions while the government and the Armed Forces of the Philippine de- clared a suspension of military offensive (SOMO) against the New People’s Army (NPA). As a retired soldier, I want to


share my opinion about the 18- day truce between the military and the NPA. I retired from my


Send comments to opinion@manilatimes.net or write to the Opinion Editor, The Manila Times, 2/F Dante Ang and Associates Building, 409 A. Soriano Avenue, Intramuros, Manila 1002


military service 10 years ago and now as being civilian I observed that the NPA has not changed a bit. They still conduct illegal ac- tivities, manipulating and in- timidating businessmen and killing defenseless people. I doubt the NPA’s sincerity in this ceasefire agreement because a lengthy ceasefire would give the


NPA a chance to recruit more members, to conduct illegal ac- tivities such as extortion to busi- nessmen, harass the civilians and to kill anyone who they suspect of being military supporters and informants. The NPA can deny it, of course they will as they always did, but we can not validate their words because they always lied to


What did you expect of GMA appointees?


HAT was the knee-jerk res- ponse of many Filipinos to the Supreme Court decision strik- ing down President Benigno S. Aquino 3rd’s Executive Order (EO) No. 1, which created the so- called Truth Commission. But was it a reasonable reaction? True, all of the 10 justices who ruled that EO1 violated the Con- stitution’s “equal protection” guarantee were installed by former President Gloria M. Arroyo. However, it is also true that four of the five magistrates who turned in dissenting opin- ions are also GMA appointees. The speculation has gone on to


T DAN MARIANO


cover the likelihood of a ruling favorable to Malacañang if only Mr. Aquino had shown more cor- diality to Chief Justice Renato Corona—and the rest of the Su- preme Court, for that matter— during the presidential inaugural and other occasions where the magistrates felt they were sub- jected to snubs and insults. Whether or not partisan con- siderations and personal slights came into play in the decision to rule EO1 unconstitutional, the fact remains that the legal legs on which the Truth Commission was made to stand by the administra- tion’s lawyers were brittle enough to be undercut by the justices an- tagonized by Malacañang. Those foundations collapsed under the scrutiny of the judiciary, which—unlike the pro-administra- tion legislature—feels no compul- sion to accommodate the executive. In the run-up to the general elections last May, tapping into the people’s desire to see the per- petrators of the scandals that rocked the GMA administration brought to justice was a smart


move. Mrs. Arroyo had managed to make herself the most vilified president since Ferdinand E. Marcos due to her mishandling of the “Hello, Garci” affair, the NBN-ZTE deal, the fertilizer scam and other fiascos. So strong was the anti-Arroyo sentiment that, for instance, the rumor linking Sen. Manuel Villar to the GMA campaign proved suffi- cient to shoot down his more-than- amply funded presidential bid. Soon after his proclamation


Mr. Aquino launched what looked like a lynching party to go after Mrs. Arroyo, hoping per- haps that her unpopularity would further consolidate his grip on the presidency or maybe because he felt genuinely obli- gated to fulfill a campaign prom- ise to prosecute GMA—or both. Unfortunately for him, the


Truth Commission’s proclaimed mission to focus on the alleged wrongdoings of the ex-president made it seem like the PNoy ad- ministration was singling GMA out, which one interpretation of the Constitution will not allow. From that vantage point, EO1 did look like it aimed to persecute rather than prosecute Mrs. Arroyo and her underlings. The key word here is “interpre- tation.” The justices who ruled that the Truth Commission would violate GMA’s “equal pro-


tection” rights made up the ma- jority all right. However, five other magistrates—who are pre- sumably just as learned as their majority colleagues—saw the matter differently. The voting was 10-5, but vet- eran court observers ventured that it could have gone the other way—if only Malacañang had accorded the judiciary the respect it deserves as a co-equal branch of government. With Palace mouthpieces and P-Noy’s con- gressional allies incessantly harp- ing on the issue of GMA appoint- ees, did the administration really expect to get the cooperation it needed from the Supreme Court? Even if most justices were still beholden to GMA because she appointed them to the Supreme Court, Mr. Aquino and his allies should stop banging away at this unsubstantiated allegation in or- der to explain away their sorry record in their court dealings. PNoy and his boys should in- stead take GMA’s vestigial influence on her SC appointees as a challenge. “Vestigial” because she no longer wields the enormous powers of the presidency; Mr. Aquino does. Rather than butt heads with


GMA’s appointees, Mr. Aquino and his administration would probably be better advised to launch a charm offensive of their own that would break whatever spell that the ex-president might still have on the High Tribunal. After all, there is nothing else


Mrs. Arroyo—even as a Pampanga congresswoman—can do now for her SC appointees. Even utang na loob has its shelf life. Mr. Aquino still has five and a


half years left in his presidency. He will need the collaboration of


Airport reform


to some hapless user like airlines or passengers themselves. How can one explain the business of arrival and departure cards being sourced out to outside parties who pay for them in order to use them for uncontrolled and un- censored advertising no matter how ridiculous and demeaningly it impacts on the image of the country? If we can throw billions of pesos on overpriced auto- mated electoral systems, highly expensive public works projects and conditional cash transfers, please spare some money to pay for our own arrival and depar- ture cards and the necessary overtime expenses for Immigra- tion and Customs personnel. Give the country the dignity of paying its way rather than strong-arming stakeholders of the airport and the airlines. The matter of baggage han- dling is also inefficient. This month will bring it to the fore when thousands of returning residents, visitors and overseas workers fly in and out. Last week a fully loaded plane from the US took about an hour to deliver its cargo to waiting pas- sengers who wondered if it was a slowdown being deliberately


staged. It was not, just the usual lackadaisical effort.


Another critical need is for


whoever is in charge (the civil aviation authority) to get back our safety standards to the level necessary for this country’s air- lines and tourist industry to avoid being penalized with restrictions and prohibitions that curtail our air transport from flying to cer- tain parts of the world or forbid- ding travel bookings from those parts on our local airlines. It is obvious that these are disincen- tives and penalties that we are presently undergoing because of prior neglect and careless govern- ance. These need to be redressed. It is admitted that the above


events have been repeatedly hap- pening over the years and are not the culpability of this administra- tion. However, it is time to make a determined effort to accelerate improvement via the pace of de- livery of services that will result in a new, reformed and dignified path of airport management that reflects a can-do attitude and pay its own way.


This administration has its


work cut out for it in our airports. miongpin@yahoo.com


the Filipino people. What could we expect from the NPA? We can’t expect any humility and decency from them. I believe that the Armed Forces of the Philippines will stay alert and ensure the peacefulness of the Christmas season even if there is an existing SOMO between the military and the NPA. The people trust the government and the Armed Forces of the Philippines.


RETIRED MSGT FELIPA S. SUINDENILLO Bais, Negros Oriental felipasuindenillo@yahoo.com


both the Congress and the Su- preme Court if he is to achieve his goal of good government.


Legal lightweights Would mending relations with the


Supreme Court entail abandoning the effort to prosecute GMA? Of course, not, said House Mi- nority Leader Edcel Lagman in a press statement the other day. Lagman is a political ally of


GMA’s, yet even he said that the SC ruling against EO1 “does not insu- late officials of the previous admin- istration from the jurisdiction of the Office of the Ombudsman and the Department of Justice which are the long-existing agencies authorized to investigate and prosecute officials who are alleged to have committed venalities in government.” He added: “What the Supreme Court decision stops is partisan hostility and political vengeance disguised as crusade against cor- ruption, search for truth and quest for closure.”


The problem is that the Presi-


dent’s lawyers had banked on the Truth Commission—and only the Truth Commission—to carry out the prosecution of Mrs. Arroyo. Not a few quarters have sug- gested that the President—rather than continue relying on his team of legal lightweights—broaden his consultations to include legal eagles that have the experience, the maturity and the wisdom Mr. Aquino’s lawyers sorely lack. The name of the venerable


Washington SyCip quickly comes to mind. There certainly are many others who would be ready to tell the President what he needs to hear and not what he wants to hear.


dansoy26@yahoo.com


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18