The bigger perjurers

The bigger perjurers

Like good lawyers, Senators Juan Ponce Enrile, Joker Arroyo and Dick Gordon yes-terday attacked the credibility of intelligence agent Vidal Doble. They said that Doble, under oath, had told a House hearing that he did not wiretap the conversations of former election commissioner Virgilio Garcillano and that he, also under oath, had told the Court of Appeals during a habeas corpus proceeding that he and his family were not held against his will by his old unit, the Intelligence Service of the AFP.

At yesterday’s hearing, the three senators said Doble was now singing a different tune. How could a self-admitted perjurer be believed now?

First, because there were those "Hello Garci" tapes whose existence could not be banished by the tiresome invocation of its inadmissibility as evidence under the Anti-Wiretapping Act. Second, because the administration has time and again demonstrated that it would stop at nothing in blocking the search for the truth about the wiretapping.

Given this background, Doble’s admission that he was part of the Isafp wiretapping team but that he was ordered to lie makes his testimony most credible.

Balanga Bishop Soc Villegas’ letter to the Senate joint panel holding the inquiry into the wiretapping is most revealing. He said he agreed to fetch Doble from San Carlos seminary because he was told by a Palace emissary, Remedios Poblador, that the military was determined to take Doble by force.

If Doble was a crank or a peddler of tales, why was the military ready to storm church grounds, a show of force not contemplated since the military raided the Jesuits’ house in Novaliches at the height of martial law, just to get hold of him?

Subsequently, Doble and his family were sequestered at the Isafp compound inside Camp Aguinaldo. These circumstances certainly were not conducive for a soldier in active service to accuse his superiors of violating the law.

Fast forward to the present. If Doble is now lying, why don’t his superiors appear before the Senate inquiry and controvert his allegations point by point?

The former head of Isafp, Tirso Danga, was a no-show. Likewise, former AFP chief Efren Abu. Their excuse for snubbing the Senate hearing? Executive Order 464 which has been reincarnated as Memorandum Circular 108 after the former was declared as unconstitutional by the Supreme Court.

Clearly the stone-walling and the cover-up are continuing. Who then is the bigger perjurer?

Doble or those who continue to insist the "Garci tapes" are legally non-existent and who are as determined as before to hide the truth about the wiretapping.

Web gets wider

Web gets wider

TWO OF THE MOST FORMIDABLE, IF NOT intimidating, lawyers in the Senate took turns trying to beat Vidal Doble’s credibility (arguably shaky at best, to start with) to a pulp. Sen. Joker Arroyo tried to point out the contradictions between Doble’s past testimony and the version he gave the Senate. Arroyo seemed eager to spotlight Doble’s having had a civilian lawyer, which would suggest that the testimony was beyond military pressure—until Doble pointed out that his civilian lawyer was provided by the Philippine National Police.

Sen. Juan Ponce Enrile focused on Doble’s habeas corpus petition filed with the Court of Appeals, a document prepared by opposition-affiliated lawyers. Doble, however, revealed that he had been reminded, before he testified, that the long and short of whatever he said was that he remained under the authority of his unit, the Intelligence Service of the AFP. So, Doble said, with that pointed reminder still ringing in his ears, he lied.

Instead of demolishing Doble’s credibility, Arroyo and Enrile simply clarified the tremendous pressure—Doble himself bluntly said it was duress—that tainted not his latest, but his previous, testimony.

Arroyo and Enrile—as unlikely a pair of comrades-in-interest we would ever hope to find, but politics indeed makes for strange bedfellows—had to retreat with obviously ruffled feathers, in the manner of Estelito Mendoza and his confrontation with Clarissa Ocampo. We are far from saying that Doble is an Ocampo. But the way he stood his ground, and made a shambles of the two senators’ virtual cross-examinations, is a comparable demonstration of how a witness, instead of being impeached, can impeach the prosecutors.

But it is, perhaps, with regard to Doble’s testimony that he had been approached by presidential aide Medy Poblador, that his most recent testimony truly became more than a rehash or revision of his previous statements.

Doble said Poblador approached him, after he was spirited back to military custody under the auspices of Bishop Socrates Villegas, and offered him money in exchange for his refusal to testify before the House of Representatives. The public might just be willing to give the military the benefit of the doubt, for successfully retrieving one of its own who had, essentially, become a rogue agent. An aide of the President offering incentives to a witness to refuse cooperation with the House, on the other hand, is another matter altogether.

Poblador acts as a liaison between Congress and the President. She was perhaps most obviously in her role as presidential fixer during the first impeachment attempt, where she lurked in the lounge behind the Speaker’s chair in the plenary hall, for reasons best left to congressmen to reveal. There is no doubt she holds a favored place in the President’s innermost circle of can-do people.

The question now becomes, whether Poblador acted in a manner resembling US President Richard Nixon’s aides, to keep E. Howard Hunt, implicated in the Watergate break-in scandal, quiet in exchange for money. In the United States, the result of Nixon’s authorizing the bribe effort resulted in one of the articles of impeachment filed against him. We cannot emphasize how serious the allegation of Poblador’s potential involvement could be, precisely because it’s so reminiscent of the Nixon case.

Doble’s allegations concerning Poblador, who seems to have used family ties with Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, the Archbishop of Manila, to get Bishop Villegas involved, brings up questions about how the administration wields its clout with the Catholic hierarchy. Either the prelates naively acted in good faith, or were co-conspirators in crimes that range from intimidating a witness, including coercing the witness to commit perjury, to (possibly) outright kidnapping and the creation of a situation where an aide of the President could make an offer Doble couldn’t refuse.

At the heart of it is an insight into motive: If Doble were simply a liar, no government would have gone this far, possibly broken so many laws, or risked wrecking so many reputations. That it did suggests Doble really has the goods on them.

Waiting for the truth

Waiting for the truth

Scratch a liar and you’ll find a thief, a priest said, as he expressed the public’s hope that Romulo Neri would tell the truth about the government’s broadband contract with Chinese firm ZTE Corp. Neri was the socio-economic planning secretary and director-general of the National Economic and Development Authority when he was allegedly offered P200 million in exchange for a NEDA endorsement of the ZTE deal.

The story was followed by reports that Chairman Benjamin Abalos of the Commission on Elections had offered $10 million to the son of Speaker Jose de Venecia Jr. so a ZTE competitor where the younger De Venecia is a majority shareholder would withdraw its bid for the broadband deal. Confronted with the story about the P200 million, Neri would neither confirm nor deny it, saying only that such matters were hard to prove.

Neri has been shunted to the Commission on Higher Education — a move that obviously caught both him and the man he replaced by surprise. The inevitable speculation is that the transfer was connected to the ZTE deal. Neri reportedly informed President Arroyo, who chairs the NEDA, about the purported P200-million bribe offer. The President allegedly told him to ignore the offer but approve the ZTE deal anyway. This is tantamount to condoning corruption, involving an amount that would constitute the serious crime of plunder.

Neri says he believes in karma, which is why he never accepted bribes. But crimes can also be committed through acts of omission. By looking the other way, the culture of corruption is perpetuated. It will take only a few good individuals to fight venality and other forms of evil. There must be such individuals of integrity and courage in this country — public servants who put more weight on truth and justice, who owe their allegiance to the nation and their Maker rather than their boss the appointing power.

At stake for Neri is a government position that he apparently does not even want. Would it be such a big loss for him in exchange for telling the truth?

The Latin Mass: beyond the language

The Latin Mass: beyond the language

The Latin Mass?

“I’m all for it. I love that Mass with all the memories linked to it. Like the High Mass I attended in the Seville cathedral. Besides I know Latin.” “OK din ako sa Latin Mass, for the feeling of unity, reverence and greatness for God, anywhere.”

For us, “Latinized” in worship and Westernized in culture, so easily rekindled is nostalgia for the mysterious murmurings of a remote priest speaking a strange tongue, and for the beauty and solemnity of all the “smells and bells” of Mass on the high altar. But I wonder if our faith stirrings for practices old and beautiful occurred while they were happening in our youth, or as memories go, mainly upon sweet recall. We may have been moved to “feeling holy” then, but even then we would be children hissing “Patis kamatis” for every “Ora pro nobis” in the endless litanies.

As for the “liturgical chaos” after Vatican II, the cultural-religious matrix of the romanticized medieval past of the West, Asia and Africa in the past and present, and modern East and West, are worlds apart. If old Europe and our own elders and ourselves worship with folded hands, calloused (or knee-padded) knees and bowed heads, and Asians do so with silence and Africans with movement and song, and today’s global generations X and Y as they choose, who is to judge what is proper and improper?

Other reactions range from nonchalance to alarmist. It’s “not terribly earth-shaking,” not “a rightward lurch.” It’s just an “option,” a “permission” that “does not oblige.” But “may” can turn to “must” (possible, if the Church from the Vatican down to the parishes are systematically set in motion to disseminate the Latin Mass). It’s a “triumph of conservatism” setting the Church on “a new old course.” It’s a step back for Vatican II and may drag along its other reforms. When you come to think of it, 42 years of Vatican II and how go its 16 great decrees? Cry not for Edsa I, it’s only 21 years old.

There is one more important factor to consider. Rina Jimenez-David mentioned the word “inculturation” in her column. Let me pursue that loaded word. “Today, many Asian and African theologians are attempting to express the Christian faith in terms of the cultures and religions of their peoples.” Scholar and priest are making a case to “root their faith in the cultural moorings of their communities, shedding the European images and symbols that obscure Christianity in the region... Faith is common. But its expression should be in local culture. Most rites in the Catholic Church are rooted in local culture.” (Look at our pasyon-pabasa-cenaculo).

The future of Christianity is shifting from Europe and North America to Africa, Asia and Latin America, and the latter are justifiably sensitive about their cultures. (Witness the flak Pope Benedict XVI received for his remarks on Brazil’s indigenous cultural heritage.)

Here’s more. “Christ’s story is an Asian story” and “the roots of Christianity are sunk deeper in the East than in the West.” The historical threads are challenging and even disconcerting for anyone steeped in classical Western tradition and once made to believe that this was superior.

Comes now this hint of a re-Europeanization of the Church. It’s no secret that Pope Benedict is “European to the core, and for him Western Europe remains the heart of the Church.” If so, who cannot appreciate him for the dream and the goal to bring back Europe to the Church, now painfully “reduced to a geriatric, art-filled echo chamber”?

Who cannot share his dream of doing so? Except that, in view of the need for inculturation and an equally deep if not deeper claim to the roots and character of Christianity, the return of Europe to the Church need not mean Europeanizing the rest of the world, beginning perchance with the return of the Latin Mass.

But why should there be any tension between inculturation and Europeanization? Live and let live. Unity in diversity, not uniformity. Latinizing all of us is unrealistic. Consider:

In the e-mail: “… from my silent pew, the people seemed irrelevant. This Mass belonged to priest and his altar boys…. to hand [the Church’s] highest form of public worship back to Father makes Latin illiterates like me irate.” So, “is the Church the people or the institution?”

“Oratio Imperata Ad Petendam Pluviam.” The official language may sound all that royal and authoritative, but does that mean anything to the masses?

“People’s heads were buried in thick black missals.” What about the no-read no-write no-money Africans and Filipinos who can never have a missal? (“What’s a missal?” asks my son.) Whither the universal Church?

Here is an unlikely but possible scenario. Who knows? Sometime in the future, we may have not just two official Mass liturgies—the Latin and the vernacular—but even more: like Masses with celebrant priests sitting on the ground or in low seats like Jesus at the Last Supper; or exuberant Masses like those of the Charismatic movements; or Masses sung, chanted, whispered, whether in church, mall or park—all permitted according to need and culture, without anybody frowning in disapproval. I am sure Christ in the Eucharist will smile and bless us all.

Preposterous, say the conservatives. Possible, say the dreamers. What happens when differing sides refuse to budge? The natural outcomes acquire a life of their own and become accomplished facts.

Looks like rain

Looks like rain

A week after Gaudencio Cardinal Rosales, the Archbishop of Manila, called on the clergy in his archdiocese to pray for rain, and a mere three days after the Sunday Masses in the area resounded with the “oratio imperata ad petendam pluviam” (literally, obligatory prayer to request for rain) that he had ordered read in all churches and shrines, the heavens obliged and the rains fell.

It’s almost enough, one could be forgiven for thinking, to make an unbeliever question his unbelief.

But we will leave the catechism business to the catechists. Our interest is in understanding how the cardinal’s appeal sheds light on present-day society. Not the sweet irony of seemingly answered prayers -- what does that say about the times we live in? But the cardinal’s appeal, his characteristic return to nature.

Here’s the thing. In our responses to the drought and the looming power shortage, our true character stands revealed. Faced with a natural calamity, the “arzobispado” called on the God of all nature. “We implore the master of all creation, God, our father, at whose command the winds and the seas obey, to send us rain,” Rosales wrote in the letter to his priests.

Faced with the exact same crisis, Malacañang called ... for emergency powers. “As the situation warrants, I’m very sure that there’s nothing that would prevent us from asking Congress for emergency powers,” Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita said, on the same day Rosales circulated his letter.

There is, of course, a great difference between the roles of a religious leader and a government official; we certainly do not mean to say that it would have been better if Malacañang had issued the call for prayers. That would have been an admission of incompetence, or perhaps of panic. We also do not mean to suggest that the Executive has done nothing regarding the crisis. Yes, certainly, the red carpet was pulled from under President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s feet a week after her State of the Nation Address, after it became clear that the worst crisis of the year had not even figured in her speech. But mitigation measures are in place, and various agencies of the Executive are dusting off contingency plans.

But while some mocked the cardinal’s almost naive faith in “the master of all creation,” many more attacked the executive secretary’s almost indecent faith in more power.

Of course, any talk of emergency powers has now dissipated, in the wake of this week’s rains.

To be sure, the dry spell is far from over. The rains the two storms brought in the last couple of days raised the water level in Angat Dam by only a fraction. And people have died and thousands have been displaced as a result of the weather.

Forgotten amid the collective sighing in relief, however, is another, equally vital part of the cardinal’s message, the appeal to all the faithful to make conservation possible by “sharing” one’s resources. In his letter, Rosales prayed that God “move us to share more, to serve more and to love more,” and that the Creator “inspire us in this time of crisis to share … what we have and to take responsibility for one another and for the environment and resources you have generously provided us.”

This is the true sacrifice: to do the counter-instinctive thing, and share already scarce resources with one another.

How is that even possible? Catechists will have a ready answer. They will point to the famous miracle of the Multiplication of Loaves, the one where Christ’s disciples scrounge around for food to feed a multitude, and manage to gather five loaves and two fish. And the catechists will point out the real miracle: that exhausted and hungry men and women were moved to share their meager rations with everyone else.

That Malacañang could not issue a similar call, even if it wanted to, says much about our life and times.

The population question, again

The population question, again

IT is reported that the Philippine population is now nearing the 89 million mark. The very mention of our population numbers triggers thoughts about our “population problem.” This in turn leads our thoughts to the conflicting position of the Church and many concerned people in the business and political world regarding the proper approach and solution to this concern.

For all the talk in the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines about “critical collaboration,” the population question is one area where the CBCP has not been able to, precisely, collaborate critically with the government in approaching, assessing and solving the “problem.” In fact, in this matter, the CBCP and the government have long had an adversarial relationship, dating back to the Marcos times. I am one of those who believe that there can be some kind of collaboration between the CBCP and the government in this matter.

Here, what I want to do is state clearly what is non-negotiable and what is negotiable in the positions taken by the CBCP. Then, I want to suggest how there can be some sort of limited but helpful collaboration between the CBCP and the government.

The non-negotiables: (1) The Church teaches that direct abortion, direct sterilization and direct contraception are wrong in themselves and should not be resorted to. Hence, there is no way that it will say yes to the promotion of these immoral practices. (2) The Church believes that the decision regarding the number of children the couple should have lies with husband and wife themselves. Hence, the Church will object to any coercive type of birth control. (3) The Church considers truthfulness a basic moral consideration in any activity. Hence, the Church cannot accept and propagate deceptive information and will demand that full and truthful information be given regarding birth control methods.

These are the only non-negotiable points regarding the Church’s position on birth control.

It is not the official Catholic position that there is no population problem in our country. It is not the official Catholic position that we should not decelerate our population growth rate. A good Catholic may hold the position that there is a mismatch between our population growth rate and our resources to meet the needs of our growing population. A good Catholic may hold that we should slow down our population growth rate to a manageable level.

Again, while the Church advocates only natural family planning in order to implement a responsible parenthood program, the Church does not reject as immoral any method of birth control that is not directly abortifacient, sterilizing or contraceptive.

So, in what ways can the Church and the government collaborate? Personally, I think it will be a waste of time for the Church and the government to try to come to a consensus that there is indeed a population problem, and that our population growth rate should be curbed. Within the Church itself, that question has not been settled. And I believe that it need not be settled in order to achieve effective collaboration.

But the Church and the government can still collaborate toward improving our economic and social condition as a people. They should agree on promoting responsible parenthood. They should agree to project this message together: “Couples should bring into the world only the children whom they can raise up as good human beings.” There will be no objection from the Church to this message, which expresses part of the meaning of responsible parenthood according to Catholic teaching. If all couples get this message and put it into practice, we will arrive at the optimal population growth rate.

In addition, the government can offer to subsidize (without strings attached) the natural family planning program of the Church. Again, there are no insurmountable obstacles for the Church to receive such assistance for a thoroughly moral natural family planning program.

It will be more difficult to effect collaboration if the Church should be asked to take part in government programs of birth control. Bishops have some reservations about being co-opted and being made a part of a government population control program with morally objectionable components from their point of view.

With such beginnings, the Church and government may later on develop other forms of collaboration beneficial to our people.

Outpacing economic growth

Outpacing economic growth

One of the few sources of pride of the administration is the country’s economic performance. But the good news is always tempered by the fact, admitted by the administration, that the benefits of economic growth have not trickled down to the masses. There are several reasons for this, a number of which the government is moving to address. But one of the most glaring has been consistently ignored by the administration: economic growth cannot keep up with population growth.

The National Statistics Office, which launched the other day a nationwide census, expects the population to grow by less than two percent this year. The growth rate has slowed down in the past years, but this year’s growth will translate into a population of 88.7 million. That’s still a huge number that will put additional strain on limited resources and basic services.

As things stand, the government can barely provide those services. Public schools are filled to capacity and the deterioration in the quality of education has taken its toll on the quality of the nation’s workforce. Health centers are shutting down due to an acute lack of doctors and nurses. In densely populated cities, new mothers share beds in government hospitals. For want of decent jobs and livelihood opportunities, people continue to leave the countryside, turning urban migration into a serious problem. The growing lack of agricultural workers threatens the nation’s food security.

The government can boost national production and generate employment to meet the needs of a growing population. Unable to do this, the growth in demand can be tempered through an effective family planning program. This the administration has refused to undertake, with President Arroyo invoking her religious beliefs to explain her stand on family planning.

The position has earned the President brownie points with the Catholic Church, which frowns on all forms of artificial contraception. But as a result, millions of couples lack information on options in planning the size of their families, and women are deprived of information on their reproductive rights. Until the government finds the political will to intervene, population growth will continue to outpace economic growth, and economic benefits will continue to elude the poor.