Ping, work for run off elections instead
The reopening of the “Hello, Garci” controversy is but the first leg in the race for the presidency in 2010. Even Sen. Panfilo Lacson, the instigator of the probe into the 2004 bugged telephone conversation, does not seem confident that a second inquiry would go any farther than the first.What it would accomplish though is to help Lacson capture the sort of media coverage that this early could put him on pole position in the presidential race. You don’t have to be a political scientist to figure that one out.
If there is still any doubt that a reopening of the “Hello, Garci” case would be anything but investigation in aid of election, how come it has drawn either perfunctory or no support from Manny Villar, Loren Legarda and Mar Roxas—all likely rivals of Ping’s in 2010?
By placing all its bets in the last senatorial elections—which it won in spectacular fashion—the opposition blew any chance of beefing up its presence in the House of Representatives. True, the opposition succeeded in turning the senatorial elections into a referendum on President Arroyo; but it found itself outmaneuvered in the congressional races.
As a result, there are now fewer oppositionists in the House than there were in the Thirteenth Congress—meaning, there are not enough congressmen to launch a credible bid to impeach Mrs. Arroyo once more. And impeachment is still the only legal way to sack a sitting president.
Lacson is well aware an impeachment bid now would be an exercise in futility—that is, if deposing Mrs. Arroyo is really what he has in mind.
The last senatorial elections showed that a candidate need not spend a bundle in campaign advertising. Rather, it is constant, favorable coverage by the legitimate news media that really counts come Election Day.
Reopening the “Hello, Garci” case—or just the attempt to do so—gives Lacson the advantage of a flying start.
But even if Lacson does manage to come out on top in 2010, he will be vulnerable to the same kind of instability that has plagued the current Chief Executive and her immediate predecessors.
With the introduction of the cumbersome multiparty system, as mandated in the 1987 Constitution, the presidencies of Fidel V. Ramos, Joseph E. Estrada and Gloria M. Arroyo—not to mention Corazon C. Aquino’s—have been wobbly at best. Election by a mere plurality of voters made sure there is a larger segment of electors who did not vote for the winner.
FVR could never quite get rid of the thorn on his side named Miriam D. Santiago, who insisted—and still insists—that she was robbed of victory in 1992.
Erap, despite being the darling of the masses, could not defend himself from his “elitist” and leftist adversaries who took less than a week of street demonstrations to force him out of Malacañang.
That GMA has managed to survive a plebian uprising, a couple of mutinies and impeachment bids—not to mention Cabinet defections—gives ample testimony to her staying power. Still, it has not put to rest the stubborn questions about the legitimacy of her mandate. Although she can no longer seek reelection in 2010, the President continues to behave like she is still on the campaign trail.
An insecure presidency is what Lacson—or whoever wins two and a half years from now—will inherit even after hise proclaimed. Faced with so many rivals, the victor in 2010 will have to contend with the same causes of destabilization that GMA must deal with now.
What could assure an indisputable mandate is a mechanism long practiced in many mature democracies: runoff elections. If the first round of voting does not result in a clear majority—i.e. over 50 percent—for the first placer, another election is held between him/her and the second placer.
The winner of the runoff could then claim a solid mandate. Having gained the support of over half the voters, he/she could put to rest any questions about the legitimacy of his/her presidency.
Rather than continue to shake up the current administration, Lacson—along with the other presidential hopefuls—would be well advised to help ensure that when their time comes, their own regimes would not be as shaky.
More than a reshuffle of the Commission on Elections or a purge of the voters’ list or even multibillion-peso automation, a runoff vote could prove more effective in restoring confidence in our presidential elections.
