How do you solve a problem like Jamby?

How do you solve a problem like Jamby?

That is the question confronting the senators and congressmen who are members of the powerful Commission on Appointments (CA).

Last week Sen. Ana Consuelo Madrigal invoked wholesale Article 20 of the bicameral body’s rules, thus preventing the promotion of 24 ranking officers of the Armed Forces of the Philippines. She raised her objection in plenary session although other CA members do not recall her doing so when the appointment of the same officers were being tackled at the committee level.

Agusan del Sur Rep. Rodolfo Plaza told the Kapihan sa Sulo media forum Saturday that while Madrigal may have attended the pre-plenary deliberations on the officers’ promotion, he does not recall her coming on time.

Madrigal, according to CA and Senate sources, is notorious for her tardiness. Even columnist Angelito Banayo, in his testimony before the Senate blue-ribbon inquiry into the NBB-ZTE deal, revealed that Madrigal came late to the “secret meeting” former economic planning secretary Romulo Neri had with Sen. Panfilo Lacson, star witness Jun Lozada and others in Makati last December.

According to CA rules, any member can invoke Section 20 to suspend consideration of any nomination or appointment—including those favorably recommended by a standing committee and the chairman—without question from the rest of the bicameral body.

So why did Madrigal invoke Section 20 last Wednesday?

Other CA members said they believe it was her way of getting back at her colleagues who did not go along with her two weeks ago when she tried to block the promotion of a general who had a run-in with jailed Sen. Antonio Trillanes 4th, another Jamby favorite.

“She was awake but sleeping,” was how a published report quoted Plaza as saying about the incident when Madrigal failed to hear the name of the officer when it was read during plenary session for confirmation.

The only other CA member who agreed with Madrigal when she wielded her one-woman veto last Wednesday was Lacson—to the surprise of no one.

The Ping and Jamby tandem has been the motive force behind the NBN-ZTE probe, seemingly superseding the blue-ribbon committee chairman Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano.

A number of Senate reporters noted that Lacson and Madrigal—putative partners in the 2010 presidential election—now seem to be “running the chamber, setting the agenda, overstepping even some of their more senior colleagues, including those who also belong to the opposition.”

A veteran newspaperman who has covered the chamber since the 1990s noted how the Ping and Jamby team seems to be exercising greater influence over their fellow senators than Senate President Manuel Villar.

The tandem’s newfound sense of power has evidently extended even to the CA. However, most of the 22 other members of the bicameral body now feel that Madrigal, as abetted by Lacson, has gone too far.

Sen. Rodolfo Biazon, a former AFP chief of staff, fumed after Madrigal invoked Section 20. The former Marine general, who took up the cudgels for the officers affected by Jamby’s stunt, moved to amend the CA rules if only to prevent her from repeating it in the future.

Madrigal responded that she blocked the AFP officers’ confirmation because she wants to “reform” the CA.

“As minority floor leader of the commission, I invoke this powerful provision of our rules to send a strong message: Reform the commission now!” Madrigal said. “Tapusin na natin ang bata-bata at padrino system sa Commission on Appointments.”

Madrigal’s reformist posturing, however, failed to impress most of her CA colleagues—and the public.

Sen. Richard Gordon summed up the annoyance with Madrigal when he said: “She must explain to everyone and to every individual here that has earned star rank through blood and guts that she is using it fairly—without whim, caprice or arbitrariness.”

So, how do you solve a problem like Madrigal who evidently will not hesitate to brandish Section 20 just to make a point, no matter how bizarre?

Former Sen. Francisco Tatad said, also at the Kapihan sa Sulo, that any CA member “who does not actively participate in the pre-plenary deliberations should not be allowed to invoke Section 20.”

The leading opposition figure added that objections to any appointment should be voiced at the committee level, which Madrigal apparently failed to do in the case of the 24 AFP officers whose careers she has put on hold and whose individual reputations she has besmirched—with Lacson’s collaboration.

Tatad, however, did concede that the CA could stand some reforming. He said that the bicameral body needs to be “more proactive,” as he recalled the case of former Chief Justice Hilario Davide Jr. who was named the country’s permanent representative to the United Nations—even without CA confirmation and despite the fact that he is past the mandatory retirement age of 70 for public officials.

But that’s another matter—or is it?

Who's Next

Who's Next

After the anti-graft court Sandiganbayan convicted deposed President Joseph Estrada of plunder last week, government officials, civil society leaders and media people began asking, “Who’s next?” The Sandiganbayan decision has shown that no one is exempt from accountability, not even a former president, and it should embolden everyone to pursue graft and corruption cases against those who have to answer for them.

For her part, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo last Thursday created the Procurement Transparency Group, which will monitor procurement for public projects and report irregularities to the agency heads concerned. She also formed a Pro-performance Infrastructure Monitoring Group.

But what is needed in dealing with the problem of graft and corruption are not new government agencies but resolute action against grafters. We already have many government agencies charged with bringing corrupt officials to justice. What is needed is the political will to go after these officials and not to let up until they are all behind bars.

For starters, Ms Arroyo and other officials should act on the following cases:

(1) The $2-million extortion charge against former Justice Secretary Hernando Perez filed by former Manila Rep. Mark Jimenez in 2001. Estrada had said then that Jimenez gave Perez $2 million to approve the $470-million contract to rehabilitate a power plant in Laguna won by the Argentine firm Industrias Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Anonima (Impsa). Graft prosecutors said there was sufficient evidence to establish that Perez and company had committed “illegal acts.”

(2) The P1.3-billion election computerization deal. The Supreme Court on Jan. 13, 2004 voided MegaPacific’s contract to supply the Commission on Elections (Comelec) with 1,991 automated counting machines because the deal was tainted “with graft and legal infirmities.” Strangely, however, the Ombudsman on Oct. 2, 2006 absolved of any wrongdoing Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos and other officials involved in the deal.

(3) The alleged P532.9-million overpricing of the P1.1-billion 5.1-kilometer President Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard in the Manila Bay reclamation area. The Ombudsman has upheld the allegation of whistle-blower Sulficio Tagud Jr., a former director of the Public Estates Authority (PEA), that the road was overpriced by 250 percent and the bridge by 67 percent. The Ombudsman has approved the filing of graft charges against 20 PEA officials, six auditors of the Commission on Audit and Jesusito Legaspi, owner of JD Legaspi Construction firm that constructed the road, described by Tagud as “the most expensive asphalt road in the country.”

(4) The P200-million Jose Pidal case. In 2003 Sen. Panfilo Lacson accused Jose Miguel Arroyo, husband of President Arroyo, of amassing more than P200 million from campaign contributions to Ms Arroyo and putting the money in secret bank accounts, including that of “Jose Pidal.” Last June, Lacson criticized Sen. Joker Arroyo, former chair of the Senate blue ribbon committee, for sitting on the Jose Pidal case.

(5) The $503-million Northrail project. Former Senate President Franklin Drilon said the project was one of the “colossal corrupt deals” of the Arroyo administration. In August 2005 the University of the Philippines Law Center said the contract between Northrail and the China National Machinery and Equipment Corp. Group was illegal because of “questionable terms” and should be annulled. It also urged the filing of criminal, civil and administrative charges against some public officials and private individuals.

(6) The P728-million fertilizer fund scam. Former Agriculture Undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-joc” Bolante was accused of distributing P728 million in fertilizer funds to local leaders to ensure Ms Arroyo’s election victory in 2004. Bolante fled to the United States, was arrested at the Los Angeles International Airport. He has chosen to be detained in the US rather than be deported to Manila.

(7) The $329-million National Broadband Network.

If the President is sincere in going after grafters in the government, she should order all the government agencies concerned, including the two offices she recently created, to go hammer and tongs after all the individuals and offices involved in these seven high-profile cases. The Estrada plunder case has shown that “big fish” can be caught, prosecuted, sentenced and put behind bars. From now on, there should be no pussyfooting and foot-dragging on graft and corruption.

Automated barangay elections?

Automated barangay elections?

Gloria Arroyo strikes again all the way from left field with her proposal to auto-mate elections starting with the October 29 exercise covering barangay officials.

For starters, there is no more time to prepare for automated elections which are scheduled in six weeks. Second, results of barangay elections do not require consolidation. Third, the barangay elections are nominally non-partisan. And fourth, as result of the second and third factors, barangay elections are hardly afflicted by the cheating, the buying of votes, the intimidation and the violence that characterize local and national elections.

In short, the barangay elections are not the problem. The local and national elections are. And automation, while it would help speed up the count, is a technical solution that misses out on the wider dimensions of the problem.

We don’t mean the sort of transformation in individual values that some argue is a prerequisite to an authentic exercise of the people’s sovereign power to elect their leaders. For we can storm the heavens with our prayers that the phone pals of Virgilio Garcillano be struck by their conscience and stop cooking the tabulations of votes, and only end up losing our belief in the power of prayer.

If we want honest and clean elections, we can start impeaching and jailing the election officials whose actions are for outright sale or, in the case of someone who is now in the limelight, in exchange for multi-million dollar- denominated overpriced deals.

But corrupt Comelec officials are the effects, not the cause, of a degenerate electoral process. For elections to be honest, we have to overhaul the structures and reverse the trends that make elections the equivalent of a war of total annihilation.

Joseph Estrada has just been convicted of plunder and sentenced to lifetime in jail. Many see his conviction as a triumph of the law. We certainly wish it were so, because we would be seeing most of the current high officials joining him in Bilibid in the not too distant future.

But the more likely outcome of Erap’s conviction is not the return of law. It is more likely to lead to a further travesty of the law.

Gloria is exiting in 2010. That certainly means a more dirty and bloody election for the presidency. Gloria will pull out all stops to secure the victory of her candidate, for she has to ensure she and her accomplices do not end up in the slammer like Estrada.

That’s the kind of dynamic we expect political developments to follow in the next three years and possibly further down the road. Computerization of elections is a minor sideshow to the grand drama unfolding before our eyes.

Grace period

Grace period

THROWING MONEY AT A PROBLEM WON’T SOLVE it. President Macapagal-Arroyo says the government has the cash to automate elections. Clearly, she has the upcoming barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan (SK) elections in mind.

We believe pursuing automation in a rush would be counterproductive. The Commission on Elections, in particular as it is presently constituted under the beleaguered leadership of Benjamin Abalos, shouldn’t be entrusted with the authority to shortcut bidding processes in the rush to automate the barangay elections. Instead of modernizing our electoral system, this would only open up another opportunity for a controversial purchase of equipment, which could then put every subsequent electoral exercise under a cloud of doubt. Our political skies are too overcast for this at the moment.

What would a rushed automation of barangay elections next month achieve? An army of dubiously elected ward leaders eager to do the President’s bidding in 2010.

If we are to automate, let’s do it right, under a Comelec untainted by the most disgraceful set of commissioners since the Marcos years. If we are to automate, let’s give a sector that’s pretty much more respected and distinguished than our election officials—the IT sector—a chance to arrive at a consensus on the best form of automation to undertake. If we are to automate, and if we are (sensibly) to use the barangay elections as a laboratory to debug an automated system for voting, then let’s not rush into it pell-mell; let’s give it a year, no more, no less.

A happier confluence of events is possible. The President has a chance to fill the vacancy in the Comelec chairmanship that will occur in February next year—and other vacancies that may perhaps come up (we can only earnestly hope that the current Comelec commissioners see the light and resign en masse, together with their disgraced and disgraceful chairman)—with a credible appointment.

Electoral watchdog groups and the IT sector have a chance to show they can do more than make noise, they can achieve a consensus on solutions and, who knows, even on possible Comelec appointments. Our legislature can institute much-needed reforms, not on the basis of partisanship, but in acknowledgment of the public’s yearning for cleaner elections. There is an obvious opportunity here, for the executive and legislative branches to achieve a kind of redemption—or, at least, recovery of their standing—before the people.

While we’re at it, postponing the barangay elections by a year would also allow Congress to consider a much-needed reform. We endorse the manifesto signed on Sept. 5, in Baguio City, by educators and students calling for the abolition of the SK. The manifesto, signed during the annual training convention of student council leaders in public schools, proposes that the current revenue allotment for the SK—10 percent of every barangay’s budget—be re-channelled to public education instead.

The student-educator manifesto points out that all the SK has achieved is to put in the hands of young people large sums of money that they are not prepared to handle; and to serve as a take-off point for dynastic control of local politics. Money is power; and young people all over the country are getting a corrupt and corrupting introduction into power politics by means of the SK. In contrast, student governments represent a more integrated approach to representative government, without the tempting access to large sums.

Politics: Nothing but corruption

Politics: Nothing but corruption

POLITICS, as the word is commonly understood, is nothing but corruption.

This has been proven beyond cavil about Gloria Arroyo, who has used every dirty trick in the book of politics and corrupt practices to satisfy her intense desire for power and pelf.

She has built structures of deceit and corruption ever since she usurped the presidency from Joseph "Erap" Estrada in 2001, and, once again, when she cheated Fernando Poe Jr. on her way to six more years in Malacañang in 2004.

Indeed, in the last six years of her purloined presidency, she has raised corruption to a new level of magnitude unmatched by past administrations. And this dismaying fact has not escaped the attention of Filipinos in all levels of society.

They know this, and they have seen it all, in the scandal-ridden Arroyo administration. And they have affirmed this in the latest survey of the Social Weather Stations (SWS). It showed that 71 % of the people believe that she has been enriching herself through corrupt practices. Those surveyed came from the ABC or upper and middle classes (73 %), the D Class (69 %), and the E Class (73 %).

Oh yes, in the same survey Estrada got better results on the corruption perception category. Of those polled, 66 % do not believe he enriched himself while he was president.

This latest blow dealt Gloria followed closely an earlier SWS survey that showed her trust rating was only 18 %, compared to a trust rating of 64 % for Estrada. In this new survey 76 % of ABC or upper and middle classes, 71 % in Class D and 73 % in Class E, all agreed that corruption has increased under the Arroyo administration.

The shocking survey results should have sent shivers down the spine of Gloria and her political minions and coterie of economic and financial advisers. But as it has been their wont, they have shrugged their shoulders and dismissed it all as untrue. "Hindi totoo ‘yan, "one Palace factotum arrogantly said. "Wala naman corruption nangyayari sa gobyerno." (That’s not true… There’s no corruption in government.)

This very clearly shows the moral apathy of those now in high places whenever conspicuous corruption in government is publicly exposed.

They are blind, and they refuse to read the handwriting on the Palace wall, mindless of that day when it will collapse into a heap of dust with all of them underneath!

An evening of arias and Broadway songs. I was elated to hear Rachelle Gerodias sing as guest artist in a song recital of baritone Noel Azcona at the Philamlife Theater on UN Avenue last Sunday night.

Rachelle was a clear standout with the clarion brilliance of her soprano voice. She displayed strength, accuracy and clarity in her singing of the arias "Sempre Libera" from Verdi’s "La Traviata" and "Chi il bel sogno doretta" from Puccini’s "Le Rondino." She exuded total security and self-confidence while spinning the melodic lines in the two arias, combining her sensuous and soaring voice to suit the emotion of the moment and inflecting the lyrics with theatrical energy.

Noel Azcona exhibited his musical sophistication in singing nine operatic arias and Broadway songs by Handel, Dvorak, Schubert, Mozart, Gounod, Schoenberg, and Rodgers and Hammerstein. He also sang the haunting "Magbalik Ka Hirang," a kundiman by Nicanor Abelardo. He possesses a superb voice that could easily glide from bass to baritone and even tenor levels, but, sad to say, he lacks clarity in singing the Latin, German, Italian and Russian lyrics in his repertoire.

Noel and Rachelle duetted in the delightfully gay aria "Papageno, Papagena" (from Mozart’s "Magic Flute"), and they also performed two other duets, "I Got Plenty O’Nuttin" and "Bess You Are My Woman Now" (from Gershwin’s "Porgy and Bess.")

In all the arias and songs, Mary Anne Espina, assisting artist, accompanied Rachelle and Noel with verve, dexterity and authority, on the grand piano.

Finally, Noel Azcona ended his song recital with the singing of "Anyone Can Whistle" (from Sondheim’s "Anyone Can Whistle" and "Wheels of a Dream" (from S. Flaverty’s "Ragtime", together with the internationally acclaimed UST Singers, with Prof. Fidel Calalang at the piano.

When the appreciative audience rewarded him with a standing ovation and cries for encore, Noel sang "Lenski’s Aria" from Tchaikovsky’s "Eugene Onegin", and "Iyo Kailan Paman," a serenade by Angel Pena.

By the way, Noel’s song recital was the first of three final presentations of impresario Pablo Tariman who announced, sadly, that he was drawing the curtains to a close on his "Great Performances Series", after the concerts of Alvaro Pierri, gold medalist classical guitarist, and Ilya Rashkovsky, prizewinning pianist, on December 4 and 8.

The legendary Luciano Mar warns drug industry lobbyists. His classic Italian tenor voice has been silenced by the ravages of pancreatic cancer.

"The voice of Luciano Pavarotti," as one music critic described it, "had the warm, enveloping sound, touched with a bit of husky baritonal darkness, which made his flights into the gleaming upper range all the more miraculous."

I heard Pavarotti, then dubbed the "King of the High Cs," for the first time when he sang "Tosca" at the Metropolitan Opera House in New York City. And later, I heard him again at the Philippine International Conference Center (PICC). He was not at his best when he performed there because he was nursing a terrible cold, but he still to managed to spin the lyrical phrases with bel-canto elegance of the arias and Ialian songs in his repertoire.

Now, the world of opera won’t hear anymore that powerful lyric voice that captured the hearts of millions of music opera.

Bravo, bravo, bravo, Luciano Pavarotti!

No more postponement

No more postponement

If this were a presidential election, postponement would have triggered another people power revolt. But because the lowest ranking officials in the local government totem pole were involved, opposition to a postponement was muted. And so the election of village officials and youth council members, originally scheduled in October 2005, was reset to October this year. Now, with election day again approaching, congressmen want yet another postponement, this time to 2009 – another two-year term extension for their grassroots political leaders.

Those endorsing a postponement have a good excuse: elections are expensive and this exercise will cost billions of pesos in public funds. But there will never be a lack of excuses for postponing all electoral exercises in this country, foremost of which is the disaster that is the Commission on Elections. National leaders will simply have to see to it that all voting schedules and term limits are followed, even as lawmakers review the wisdom of holding the barangay and Sangguniang Kabataan elections separately from major electoral exercises.

Since Ferdinand Marcos tried to make himself president for life, Filipinos have been leery of any attempt to allow any official to serve in perpetuity or extend his term of office. A proposal last year to extend the terms of lawmakers by only six months, to make way for constitutional amendments, was immediately shot down. The same aversion to term extensions should apply to all elective officials.

Lawmakers can authorize a postponement of the barangay and youth council elections. This means they don’t have to shell out funds to contribute to the campaigns of their political leaders, who helped them in the May elections. This also earns them the gratitude of those leaders, who get another bonus of two years without having to seek re-election. By the time Congress allows the elections to push through, the current youth council members will be too old to be classified as youths. Barangay and SK officials who have performed badly must be replaced. There are other people who want to serve and must be given a chance. That is the essence of democracy, and lawmakers must not stand in the way.

Perception vs reality

Perception vs reality

Sergio Apostol again exhibits his abysmal ignorance of how a modern society is governed in dismissing a Social Weather Stations survey where 7 out of 10 respondents said they believe Gloria Arroyo is enriching herself through corrupt practices.

Apostol says that’s just perception; reality is different. He sounds like one of those 70s New Age gurus talking pop philosophy by drawing a distinction between appearance and reality. But he doesn’t carry it off well. It clashes with our, uh, perception about Apostol, he of the multi-million allowances when he was ensconced in his sinecure as chairman of one of the subsidiaries of the Philippine National Oil Co.

We have, however, to give it to Apostol. That posting was his "consuelo de bobo" for not getting a Cabinet post in the Arroyo cabinet despite doing what he perceived as a yeoman’s job in prosecuting Joseph Estrada in the impeachment trial. Let’s not be uncharitable by saying the reality of his performance as prosecutor was something else.

Anyway, Apostol is now a member of a Cabinet as presidential legal adviser. With the exception of Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez, Apostol is perceived – here we go with that fashionable word again – as the most rabid attack dog of Arroyo. If there’s justice in this world, he ought to be in line for the post of the ailing Gonzalez. Agnes Devanadera, however, seems to have the inner track to the justice portfolio.

Apostol, like Avis, should try harder by equipping himself with a less shopworn analytical tool than the appearance/reality distinction. He should, we suggest, start with trust, the principle that underpins relationships in a democratic society. All our waking moments, we implicitly trust that all others will abide by society’s norms. Trust gains even more importance when we are dealing with the relationship between the citizens their leaders.

When people start believing their leaders are talking from both sides of the mouth, then that relationship of trust starts fraying. When the discordance between appearance and reality – and word and action – becomes habitual and institutionalized, trust is irredeemably broken.

We are near that stage. Everybody believes the worst about Gloria. While we won’t say perception is reality, we cannot simply dismiss the never-ending scandals – the $330 million national broadband project is but the latest – that hound the Arroyo administration.

If we have any consolation, it’s the thought that Gloria will be exiting in 2010. We are looking forward to the day when good governance becomes the appearance and the reality.

Back to square one

Back to square one

They say that the more things change, the more they remain the same.

The sad part is when change comes by force, it never really changes things, we simply rearrange things. Once again this truth occurs to me as people anticipate the decision to be handed down by the Sandiganbayan regarding the plunder case against President Joseph Estrada. All the anticipation, speculation and security preparations make me feel as if I’m going back in time. But why do we seem to be on a permanent political “Unmerry-go-round”? Let’s look back and figure it out.

When people staged EDSA 1, many believed that they had truly changed things for the good. They had successfully kicked out the dictatorship and sent all their allies packing to the US, Switzerland, Thailand etc.

It did not take long for people to learn the saying that “the Revolution always eats its children”, slowly those who were in the forefront of the People Power found themselves displaced by experts, interest groups as well as sweet talkers and operators. In time the first and second wave of believers and idealists were eventually pushed out or walked out in frustration.

One morning people woke up realizing that the oppressors they had chased out of the country were now back in town. Soon they would eventually be back in circulation and eventually back in power, but with a more positive image as businessmen, seasoned politicians, and king makers.

EDSA 2 was less than idealistic since it was as history has shown us nothing more than a “power grab”, supported and fueled by fear and greed, not by a few politicians but by businessmen, the church, as well as ordinary people convinced that a “drunk” and a “womanizing gambler” would lead the country into ruin. But rather than finish the “Impeachment process” the matter was settled at EDSA.

Now seven years later the deposed President casts his shadow on the national landscape like an unpredictable storm cloud. After years of imprisonment in his Tanay rest house, Erap continues to receive the individuals who were architects and supporters of his removal from office. In a matter of weeks the Sandi-ganbayan is expected to read out its decision and judgment. Several thousand soldiers and policemen have been deployed all over Metro Manila in anticipation of protests or civil disturbance from Erap supporters. Even in jail Erap is somehow back in power.

The contending parties are once again formulating strategies, trying somehow to throw blow for blow with Erap, determined to score points while Malacañang desperately tries to somehow put closure. So we are “Back to square one”. But why do we always end up here?

Simply put, because the ones who call themselves “the good guys” or most Filipinos for that matter, do not fully appreciate our “Laws” and they are either too poor or too impatient to go through the process of finding justice. In addition those in a position to contribute to a good justice system, Like the executive department, associations of lawyers, judges and justices, Religious organizations etc, generally contribute with their interests in mind.

On the other hand, the so called “Bad guys” who were run out of office or chased out of the country are left with no choice but to follow the law and utilize the justice system. First to get back into the country, get back their personal assets, and to re-establish their position whether in government or society. Since they have the assets or the money to begin with, they always have the option of hiring the best and the brightest legal minds. They have access to qualified strategists and tacticians, and their most useful weapon is that they have all the time in the world to fight and wait while in jail or in exile.

So we see that in our rush to change things we simply rearranged them. The rest of the Marcos clan are back in the limelight, in politics, even in the front pages. Imelda Marcos reminds us of the hundred or so charges hurled at her, but none has stuck and now all that remains can be counted on her fingers.

The once reviled and original “Pacman” Danding Cojuangco is more than back in the saddle. From exile he has reclaimed his leadership of San Miguel Corporation which has grown into a regional giant and a source of pride for Filipinos. The irony is that San Miguel continues to gobble up other companies, but instead of cursing Danding Cojuangco, his former critics are rejoicing because the shares they acquired will certainly go up in value.

Much has been said and suggested on how to deal with a problem like “Estrada”. There is the talk of reconciliation, pardon, amnesty or appealing to the people to respect the decision of the court. Soon enough we will face our greatest test and our biggest opportunity to prove that our courts are independent, that our laws are just, and that the government (not its political leaders) will stand ready to uphold the law without fear or favor.

God willing when we pass this storm, all of us will give more importance and greater value to learn as well as to teach others that our laws and our Justice system serve an equally important purpose in the life of Philippine society.

As individuals like Supreme Court Chief Justice Reynato Puno who works hard to clean up the courts of scalawags and incompetents, everyone else, beginning from the universities all the way to Malacañang must learn and teach that revolts and revolutions are merely temporary solutions. Politicians must remember that life and public office have a limited term, while laws and justice are eternal.

Regaining strength

Regaining strength

From all the noise coming out of Malacañang, the bishops and police, deposed President Joseph Estrada will soon be convicted of plunder, ending a six-year wait.

And from all indications, he will be pardoned by President Arroyo. If the pardon is absolute, Erap can’t reject it.

Conviction will require his transfer from the comfort of his rest house in Tanay, Rizal to one of the national prison facilities, most likely the one in Muntinlupa. Serving time in a real prison, even if he gets VIP treatment, could soften Erap’s avowed opposition to any pardon from the woman who is still referred to as a “usurper” by his followers.

There could be some haggling over the inclusion of a specific clause in an absolute pardon that will allow Erap to hold public office again.

For a man who has managed to retain his mass following during his six years in detention, it will be a breeze to return to the Senate.

And the presidency? Erap has made no secret of his wish to return to Malacañang, if fate allowed it. Will the current administration give him the chance to return to power — and possibly get back at those responsible for his humiliation? There is an apocryphal story about Erap urinating on a San Juan cop who had incurred his displeasure when he was the town mayor. You wouldn’t want this kind of guy to hold a long-simmering grudge against you.

Yesterday Senate President Manuel Villar said he favored the acquittal of Estrada. Villar is widely believed to be positioning himself for the presidential race in 2010, and he is said to have persuaded Erap’s son, Sen. Jinggoy Estrada, to be his running mate.

Offhand getting Jinggoy looks like a political coup for Villar, who is guaranteed the support of that 30 percent of the population that has remained solidly behind Erap.

The move becomes disconcerting only when you remember that it was Villar, as speaker of the House, who fast-tracked Erap’s impeachment through the chamber in 2000, paving the way for the Senate trial.

Then again, Villar’s reported alliance with the Estradas is no longer surprising. Teofisto Guingona Jr., whom President Arroyo picked as her first vice president over microphone holder Aquilino Pimentel Jr., and who first formally hurled the accusations that led to Erap’s impeachment, went over to Erap’s side first.

Erap was impeached on allegations of large-scale corruption. People were so certain of his guilt that when his Senate allies tried to block the opening of an envelope believed to contain damning evidence against him, EDSA II was born and Erap found himself out of a job. Three months later, he was held without bail for plunder.

If the death penalty had not been abolished, plunder would have been a capital offense. This was supposed to be an open-and-shut case, and Erap’s ouster was supposed to herald a new dawn in governance.

Instead the case dragged on for six years, at the end of which Erap now finds his mass support still intact and his family firmly entrenched in both local and national politics. His support is courted by both pro-administration and opposition politicians. A recent survey said his trust rating in Metro Manila has soared. And the government is already dangling forgiveness even before his guilt is announced by the anti-graft court.

This phenomenon can be attributed not so much to anything new that Erap has done in the past six years, but to the unfulfilled promises of EDSA II and the failures of the administration.

* * *

Erap’s acquittal would have triggered a crisis of legitimacy for the administration. Was his ouster through people power unwarranted? With his conviction, the legitimacy question can be put to rest.

If he is pardoned, we must ask whether justice was rendered. The administration can point to Erap’s six years under rest house arrest as time served and explain that this is sufficient punishment for someone who, after all, won the presidency by the largest margin ever in the nation’s history of free elections. Even South Korea’s two former presidents were incarcerated for only half that time before being pardoned, and they were convicted of more serious offenses.

Another question in case of conviction is whether lessons have been learned. Will Filipinos henceforth bear in mind that corruption does not pay?

Judging from recent scandals, this has not happened.

Corruption scandals hounded this administration almost from Day One, starting with the $2 million that the President’s first justice secretary, Hernando Perez, is accused of receiving in exchange for a legal opinion that favored Argentine firm IMPSA. The case remains unresolved.

Today the nation prepares for the verdict on Erap in the midst of another corruption scandal. The amounts mentioned in connection with the ZTE deal are even larger than the kickbacks Erap allegedly received. The latest story yesterday was that officials of the National Economic and Development Authority were offered P200 million to endorse the broadband contract. Whether out of fear of prosecution, stupidity or genuine honesty, the NEDA officials reportedly declined.

The administration cannot even stage a show of determination to stamp out smuggling in Subic without the whole thing being dismissed as a cheap publicity stunt.

Aside from critics noting that the smuggled luxury vehicles destroyed were mostly old, “white papers” are now circulating, accusing Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority board director Jose Calimlim, said to be a presidential relative, of coddling smugglers at the freeport. Elsewhere in the country, administration allies are also being linked to smuggling and illegal gambling.

Such scandals have bolstered Erap’s political stock even without his lifting a finger. And he is bound to become stronger in the next three years.

Lackey

Lackey

We do not know if Raul Gonzalez spends time looking at the portraits of his predecessors. He should. His portfolio has been held by public servants, quite a few of whom took their positions seriously, and didn’t view it as an opportunity to be a lackey; some viewed it as the summit of their legal careers or a stepping stone to the Supreme Court. Two, in particular, established the possibilities for integrity while holding office: Jose Abad Santos and Jose Yulo. For all time, we would have thought, but how mutable time has proven in terms of the institutional erosion Gonzalez represents.

Abad Santos in 1922 originally stayed above the fight between Governor-General Leonard Wood and Filipino politicians, until Wood told Abad Santos that it was a fight between Americans and Filipinos: at which point Abad Santos resigned saying if such a line was being drawn, he had no recourse but to side with his countrymen.

Reappointed under subsequent American governor-generals, and then under the Commonwealth, Abad Santos then took pains to resist political pressure, whether from legislators or even the President of the Philippines: he would not hire or fire on the basis of purely political considerations, and he would not file or drop cases for political convenience. He would go on to serve in the Supreme Court and become the foremost Filipino martyr of World War II.

Jose Yulo was offered the position of secretary of justice four times. Each time, he declined. When he finally did accept the position, as the inauguration of the Commonwealth loomed, he attached a condition. He accepted, he said, “But only on one condition: that the Department of Justice be detached from politics.” Yulo would go on to become Speaker of the National Assembly, but he did so without wrecking the judiciary or leaving a reputation for partisanship while he held the justice portfolio. Two decades later, when President Ferdinand E. Marcos wanted to put together an impressive first Cabinet, he convinced the elderly Yulo to serve again, an appointment that conferred prestige on the administration.

We are used to Cabinet officers excusing every possible instance of petty politicking, on the grounds that they are merely “alter egos” of whoever happens to be president. But even the most obsessively political of our presidents (that is to say, all of them) put a premium on the justice portfolio as a flagship for their administrations. The present disreputable state of the position can be firmly traced to the present administration.

Raul Gonzalez takes what can only be described as a malicious pleasure in using his office for the partisan interests of his president. When the Senate expressed interest in pursuing allegations of wiretapping, Gonzalez said he’d start looking into the Aragoncillo spying case. He made a big to-do about asking the Americans for copies of court transcripts.

For what? The Americans investigated, then punished, one of their citizens, Leandro Aragoncillo, for leaking classified documents to his Filipino pals. Definitely a crime for an American. Is it a crime for a Filipino, under our jurisdiction? Only if we are still an American colony, with citizens and officials bound by an oath of loyalty to the United States of America.

Is there something about our government we don’t know? Does Gonzalez serve two masters—and expect everyone else to be liable for punishment for crossing Gonzalez’s apparent boss, Uncle Sam?

Gonzalez would be the first to insist he serves no master but our Republic—what he really wants to do, as he told the press, is warn the Senate it can expect “tit for tat” when it comes to investigations. He mentioned the Kuratong Baleleng case, too: suggesting his interpretation of justice is as crude as it gets. Anything and everything can be papered over, forgotten, dismissed, so long as President Macapagal-Arroyo is left alone. Embarrass the President, and the full weight of the justice department will lean on whoever dares to fight with the Palace.

So by all means, let him hide behind the President’s skirt, and let him sneer that he is only her alter ego. It only goes to show the President is foursquare behind Gonzalez: and that he is not the secretary of justice, but a crude lackey, a disgrace.

Beyond shadows

Beyond shadows

This is not to say that the plan is perfect, a full-grown Athena sprung from the head of the opposition’s Zeus.

The original explanation, issued by Deputy Minority Leader Roilo Golez, is drawn with broad strokes: “The shadow Cabinet will perform oversight activities as well as serve as critical but constructive partners [sic] in the crafting of priority measures.”
The devil, we know, is in the details. Golez declined to name who among the opposition congressmen would “shadow” which Cabinet secretary; the only other detail he offered was a list of the high-priority departments the opposition would monitor. A close look at his list, however, shows that almost every line department is included.

As we said, it isn’t perfect. The way the plan was presented is also problematic, because it stressed that aspect of opposition politics that we know, in the Philippines, by the quaint Filipino English word “fiscalize.”

An administration congressman’s quick retort to the idea proves that the plan was, in fact, received as a “fiscalizing” initiative. “There’s nothing new with the opposition’s move to form a shadow Cabinet that will perform oversight activities and that will be critical of Cabinet members. That’s what opposition members have been doing over the years during the President’s term,” said Rep. Mauricio Domogan of Baguio City. (In other terms, under other Presidents, too.)

Another political player, this time a long-time advocate of constitutional change, belittled the plan as a pale and inadequate reflection of the parliamentary system of government.

But politics, eminently, is the art of the possible. While the use of the resonant phrase is only figurative, “shadow Cabinet” as a political strategy can lead to certain outcomes; it can, as the expression goes, make things happen.

For that reason, it should be welcomed.

Setting up a “shadow Cabinet” will not only allow the opposition to hold the administration to greater account; it will also allow the opposition to place itself under greater accountability. How? It will force opposition congressmen to do their homework. It will force opposition congressmen to choose an area of specialization. (After all, generic criticism is easy; informed, expert criticism is difficult but more useful.) Not least, it will force opposition congressmen to raise the standards of policy debate and public discourse. (Whether politicians allied with the Arroyo administration will follow this lead is another matter altogether, and may be decided, in large part, at the polls in 2010.)

The principal assumption behind the “shadow Cabinet” idea, in other words, is aglow with possibility: It will help us grow in political maturity.

Consider: Instead of the minority leader (Rep. Ronaldo Zamora of San Juan) or his spokesman doing all the talking, other oppositionists will step up to the microphone. A health care crisis may require the expertise of a doctor in the House; an inquiry into the Arroyo administration’s counter-terrorism strategy may require the competence of a national-security expert.

(As politicians will be quick to realize, this setup runs counter to the personalistic nature of our politics; no one leader, no one spokesman, will hog the spotlight. This is bad for those with ambitions for higher office, but—if managed well—a boon for governance.)

To be sure, the character of Philippine politics is deeply flawed; many of its defects can end the “shadow Cabinet” experiment prematurely.

Our political parties remain weak; with one or two exceptions, they remain what they have always been since the first legislature was inaugurated a hundred years ago: political factions, centered around a political personality of fabulous wealth. The reality of political participation continues to reward sheer opportunity over obstinate principle. And the line between the administration or the opposition, despite the turmoil of the past few years, remains a blur.

But as the Greek poet Pindar said: Exhaust the limits of the possible. The “shadow Cabinet” idea seems like a good next step. Take it.

Lifestyle check

Lifestyle check

Conducting a lifestyle check on private citizens to flush out delinquent taxpayers is a good idea – if it can be implemented efficiently and if it targets the right people. In the absence of racketeering laws, the move can be used to nail down notorious smugglers, jueteng lords and other crooks who enjoy the protection of influential people. The lifestyle check, authorities said, would go hand-in-hand with a tax amnesty program. Both measures aim to boost revenue collection, which has fallen below projections, creating a bigger-than-expected budget deficit and costing the revenue commissioner his job.

On the other hand, if the measures simply provide yet another opportunity for large-scale tax evaders and crooks to keep their dirty money after giving a token tax payment to corrupt revenue collectors, the idea should be dropped. Gambling barons and smugglers can buy the protection of police and military officers, judges, prosecutors and politicians. How hard will it be for these crooks to pay off revenue collectors, many of whom are already used to accepting bribes? Corruption has long been one of the biggest hindrances to proper revenue collection. The same problem bedevils the Bureau of Customs and its efforts to stop smuggling. Many revenue and Customs collectors are likely to fail a lifestyle check.

At the hands of the inept and corrupt, the lifestyle check on private citizens is bound to net a couple of small fry who cheat on their tax payments to make ends meet. The worst use for the lifestyle check is for political harassment, which some quarters in the opposition fear. It is often said that those who follow the law have nothing to fear, but in this country, being law-abiding does not guarantee protection from state persecution. The fear is valid, considering the track record of the administration in using state power to harass political enemies.

Fiscal reforms and their positive effects on the economy have been undeniable achievements of this administration. Now weak revenue collection is threatening that bright spot. In moving to increase government earnings, the administration will need proper focus and must keep its revenue collectors on a tight leash.

Amnesia, not amnesty

Amnesia, not amnesty

It had the familiar sweeping quality of Speaker Jose de Venecia’s pronouncements: an “all-encompassing” amnesty for, as one news report put it, “all enemies of the state,” filed “soon,” in order to “unify the nation.” No halfway measures for this five-term leader of the House of Representatives; it’s all or nothing.

But in this case, it’s nothing. The proposed amnesty is so ambitious it is bound to fail. It includes all insurgents, as well as (possibly, De Venecia hinted) deposed President Joseph Estrada. The reaction from Sen. Jose “Jinggoy” Estrada, the ex-president’s co-accused son who is now, in one of history’s ironies, Senate president pro tempore, is one index of the difficulty the bill will face. His father is not an enemy of the state, he said.

To be sure, De Venecia is conscious about the limits of the proposed amnesty. “This is a wide-ranging, all-encompassing amnesty to cover all insurgents and all those who have committed political crimes against the state,” he said over the weekend. The protective mantle, in other words, reaches only those charged with or convicted of political crimes.

But De Venecia has more, much more, in mind. “This will create the beginnings of real national unity. The next president will have [fewer] tasks [on] his or her hands and at the same time it will complete a legacy for all of us.” All this legacy-speak makes sense, however, only if Estrada is included in the amnesty’s scope.

The plunder charge Estrada is facing cannot be considered a political crime (although we will, yet again, hear the case described as politically motivated, regardless of the finding, when the Sandiganbayan issues its decision in the next several weeks). But the status of Estrada’s alleged crime does not faze the ever-practical De Venecia. The former president can be included in the amnesty, he said. “Let it come normally. Let it be a consensus of all.”

It is less difficult to include Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV, who is facing coup charges before a regional trial court.

Far be it from us to argue against a policy proposal merely because it is difficult to implement or because it is certain to meet determined resistance.

De Venecia, in fact, argues from the relative successes of recent history. He pointed, for instance, to the example of Sen. Gregorio Honasan, one of a legion of coup plotters who were granted amnesty in 1995. Honasan himself the other day acknowledged the advantage of “six years of uninterrupted political stability” -- referring to the term of President Fidel V. Ramos, the ex-general who promoted amnesty as a policy and forged the peace agreement with the Moro National Liberation Front.

But that was then, and today’s circumstances are radically different.

In the first place, the 1995 amnesty was supposed to prevent future military adventurism. But the 2003 Oakwood mutiny, which the government initially alleged was masterminded by Honasan himself, shows us that success on the amnesty front has been relative indeed.

Secondly, unlike in the early 1990s, the Armed Forces of the Philippines is in the middle of a major offensive against Abu Sayyaf terrorists, in Sulu and Basilan -- an offensive that necessitates taking action against “lost commands” or rogue units of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and the Moro National Liberation Front. Any appeal for amnesty at this time is not only in poor taste; it is demoralizing for government troops who are in the thick of the fight.

Not least, those who availed themselves of the amnesty in 1995 showed remorse for their actions, or at least acknowledged their wrongdoing. Even if, by some legal or legislative sleight of hand, plunder is redefined as a political crime, we still have to hear Estrada acknowledge that he did wrong.

If it becomes “the consensus of all” to include Estrada in the general amnesty, then this proposed policy is nothing more -- and nothing less -- than a prescription for amnesia.

In other words, De Venecia’s “wide-ranging” formula as it stands is the legislative equivalent of saying, “Let’s forget everything.” That way lies continued political immaturity.

Educating Gloria

Educating Gloria

IT DOESN'T add up. The announcement that Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Romulo Neri has been named "education czar" is like an equation missing a variable.The official line is that Neri's temporary transfer to the Commission on Higher Education this week is a sign of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's resolve to fix worsening problems in the education sector. We think it is the exact opposite: It reflects, not the President's resolve, but her irresolution.

We do not question Neri's qualifications; aside from handling the economic planning and budget portfolios, he has also served as high-profile head of the Congressional Planning and Budget Office and, as he reminded reporters the other day, a professor at the Asian Institute of Management for 16 years. He also seems to have the President's ear, a not invaluable advantage for someone poised to shake up the government bureaucracy.

But all the same, his appointment raises more questions than it provides answers. Consider the following:

Earlier this month the President issued Executive Order 632, which created the position of a presidential assistant to "assess, plan and monitor the entire educational system." (Curiously, EO 632 is not immediately available online, from the otherwise impressive archive operated by the Office of the Press Secretary.) The new position has, naturally enough, been described as the office of a virtual education czar, but Neri insists he is not the new presidential assistant contemplated in the EO.

Neri says he has been asked to fix a specific problem, albeit one that has grown to crisis proportions. "We have too many unemployed college graduates," Neri said the other day, numbering "about one million." His task is to fix the "mismatch" between what the country's colleges graduate and what the country's companies employ. "We want to make sure the college graduates are matched with the requirements of the industry," he said.

This is an enormous--and necessary--undertaking; we are not sure, however, whether it is up to the CHEd to fix the problem. No doubt, the CHEd has a major role to play in reengineering the curriculum, for example, or in creating a program to turn entire colleges around, so that the degree programs they offer match the jobs available in the market. But what about the million college graduates who are already unemployed? They are the crisis; what can Neri, as CHEd chairman, do for them?

Neri was named CHEd chairman vice Carlito Puno, a long-time official who seems to have been completely left out of the loop. Reached by reporters last week, Puno refused to comment on Neri's impending takeover, saying the appointment papers had not been signed. Now the Arroyo administration is not exactly known for treating formerly useful appointees with the highest respect, but surely, if a new crisis in education does exist, shouldn't it have taken great care to ensure that an outgoing official did not, inadvertently, undermine the case it was making? As it is, the ruffled feathers and rush to publicity in Neri's new "special assignment" suggest the whole thing is just another politically motivated rigodon.

And if it is a crisis, isn't there anyone in the private sector, of sufficient stature and undeniable competence, who can help the President fix it? If education is truly one of the President's priorities, isn't it possible for her to recruit into the Cabinet a prominent personality who can serve, full time, as education czar? Indeed, instead of appointing the new presidential assistant for education, why not reconsolidate the functions of CHEd, the Department of Education and such agencies as Tesda under one office? If Education Secretary Jesli Lapus is doing a good job, why not get him to run the entire education sector?

Neri also says his transfer is merely temporary. "I have to go back after six months, hoping I can do my job properly," he said. Frankly, this sounds bizarre. If a crisis exists, how on earth can it be resolved by a troubleshooter with a six-month window of opportunity? Like we said: It doesn't add up.

Slim pickings

Slim pickings

Like dislodged clumps of arterial plaque, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s son and brother-in-law, drifting along the currents of politics, have lodged themselves in the chairmanships of two significant committees. Where they’ve lodged, they’re now poised to act, as arterial plaque does in terms of the circulation of blood, as a means of restricting the flow of legislation concerning natural resources and energy.

Is having the President’s son and brother-in-law in such prominent, gate-keeping positions in the House of Representatives the sort of signal she wants to send? As she proclaims herself in “legacy” mode, does she view her legacy as a kind of hardening of the political arteries? In a word, is this, in the phrase immortalized by the President in her recent State of the Nation Address, the “good kind of cholesterol”?

When Mikey Arroyo was given the chairmanship of the House committee on energy, Rep. Eduardo Zialcita of Parañaque City stared down criticism by citing the young Arroyo’s master’s degree in business from the University of California at Berkeley. Zialcita also said, “There are those who say that he’s not qualified, but one doesn’t have to be an expert in the power industry to know the issue confronting the sector. As chair of the committee one only has to listen and build a consensus on which solutions to adopt.”

But, of course, he could simply have told the truth (which is not to say he lied, in terms of defending the younger Arroyo; rather, it was a Churchillian “terminological inexactitude”). The ultimate arbiter of fitness for any committee chairmanship is party affiliation; second to that is perceived usefulness either to the House leadership, or the national leadership, specifically whoever happens to be president of the Philippines at the time. Expertise in the committee’s scope of legislation comes an expendable third in the House’s hierarchy of values.

The younger Arroyo’s chairmanship and the older Arroyo’s designation as chair of the committee on natural resources make perfect sense then in terms of pragmatic politics. The President proclaimed her administration as having a keen interest in energy and mining; her much-ballyhooed Cabinet revamp ended up a reshuffle, with two officials moving sideways -- Angelo Reyes from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to the Department of Energy, and Lakas-CMD party stalwart Heherson Alvarez named mining czar -- and a Cabinet portfolio serving as political reward to Lito Atienza, who closed a park and reaped stewardship of the environment as the President’s thanks.

If the President’s vision, then, is limited to political recycling, then it shouldn’t be surprising that that chamber of Congress, which is always eager to take its cue from the executive, would demonstrate an equivalent narrowness of vision. That the talent and gene pools are so obviously limited is neither here nor there for the powers-that-be. It’s not what you know, after all, that matters, but rather whom you know. And who knows the President best than her son and brother-in-law?

When the Soviet dictator Josef Stalin famously sneered, “How many divisions has the Pope?” he might as well have been a Filipino congressman. To be sure, there is opposition to the designation of the two Arroyos. But how many votes do they have? The environmentalists and consumers who have questioned the Reyes, Alvarez and Atienza appointments may make noise, but it has to be asked whether such noises can affect the shrewd political calculations the President constantly makes. The party-list representatives questioning the House’s decision, too, represent the wrong constituency.

There is no mining vote and no environmentalist vote, no constituency locally. But there are interests that are comfortable with dealing with the House and national leadership on these issues. They, too, would see the obvious political benefits in having the President’s family serve as gatekeepers in the House, for legislation required to achieve the President’s priorities.

In H.L. Mencken’s view, “Democracy is the theory that holds that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” The citizenry is certainly getting it good and hard, courtesy of the House of Representatives.

This trick of naming roads, etc., after VIPs

This trick of naming roads, etc., after VIPs

NAMING GAME: They say that one way of ensuring government support for a project, especially big ticket infrastructure, is to name it after somebody dear to the President. I don’t know if the trick works, but I won’t be surprised if it does.

In my province, for instance, local politicians pulled a scoop when they named Clark Field, the former home base of the US 13th Air Force, the Diosdado Macapagal International Airport.

If you were President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, would you allow a major airport named after your dear father go the way of ordinary weather-beaten infrastructure standing as monuments to government neglect?

But what rules are there, if any, governing the naming of public structures after notable persons, dead or alive?

* * *

DIVISIVE: Reader Jorge B. Navarra, a Butuanon, has written the National Historical Institute to ask if the renaming of the “2nd Magsaysay Bridge” in their city as “Diosdado Macapagal Bridge” complied with NHI requirements as prescribed by law.

Navarra reported: “This multibillion-peso bridge project spans the Agusan river about three kilometers upriver from the old Magsaysay Bridge in downtown Butuan. It was temporarily called 2nd Magsaysay Bridge.

“When it was inaugurated before the May 14 elections, its name was 2nd Magsaysay Bridge. The people of Butuan knew that a permanent name would be given in due time.

“Not a few Butuanons wanted ‘Butuan Bridge’ to identify this landmark with Butuan and inculcate pride of place among its citizens. This was a monumental project for Butuanons and naming it Butuan Bridge will inspire unity. This name will avoid the divisiveness caused by naming public structures after politicians, their relatives and their benefactors.”

* * *

RECOMMENDATORY: Navarra recalled that during the Butuan visit of President Arroyo last July 10, the bridge suddenly sprouted signs identifying it as “President Diosdado Macapagal Bridge.”

Then the President was reported on TV, radio and the newspapers to have accepted the resolution of the Butuan City Sangguniang Panglungsod giving the Macapagal name to it.

Did the Butuan City Sangguniang Panglungsod officially confer this name to the bridge? “If it did,” Navarra said, “was this not done in violation of the Local Government Code?”

He noted that Section 13 provides that local governments can exercise authority only over structures owned by them. It so happened that the Butuan bridge is funded by a national government loan from Japan’s ODA-granting agency.

If the Butuan Sanggunian passed a resolution endorsing to the President or to Congress the naming of the new bridge, Navarra said, this resolution is merely recommendatory.

* * *

CONSULTATION: The Macapagal name cannot as yet be adopted, he added, yet it has been placed on signs at the structure, carried in media and used by bureaucrats in referring to it.

Until a presidential proclamation is issued or a law is enacted naming the bridge, its project name “2nd Magsaysay Bridge” remains. The preparing of the proclamation or passing of a law must involve public consultations, Navarra said.

“We have no issue with the credentials of the persons being honored by naming public structures after them,” he said. “We are questioning the practice of naming highways, bridges, buildings, airports, etc., after persons using procedures that do not conform to the law.”

* * *

WHERE’S MONEY?: Sen. Mar Roxas is pressing Malacañang to tell the people where it would get the billions needed to fund the ambitious infrastructure program that President Arroyo outlined in her last State of the Nation Address.

This makes sense, because it is easy to draw up a wish list of supposed projects and wave it before an expectant population — and another thing to produced the money to make the wish come true.

Roxas said the President mentioned only these fund sources: P1 trillion from state revenues, with tax reforms, and orders to the BIR and Customs to meet their collection targets, P300 billion from government corporations, and more billions from state financial institutions, private sector investments, local government equity, and foreign loans and grants.

But after you add up the money, he said, there is still a big deficiency.

* * *

MASINLOC SOLD: The government announced the sale, finally, of the 600-megawatt Masinloc coal-fired power plant in Zambales.

This is significant because Masinloc is the most valuable among the power-generating plants of the National Power Corp. and has been the subject of questioned attempts to sell it to favored bidders.

The Singaporean-led consortium Masinloc Power Partners Co. Ltd. won the auction after submitting a $930-million bid. It will be asked to pay 20 percent of that price up front after the official transfer of the plant.

The MPPC is affiliated with Singapore’s AES Transpower Pte. Ltd., an investment holding and service company for entities involved in generating, accumulating and trading electricity.

Losing bidders included big names: Masinloc Consolidated Power Inc. (which bid $588 million), Masinloc Holdco Inc. ($606 million), Anglo Cayman Energy Development Co. Ltd. ($650 million); First Gen Luzon Power Corp. ($710 million).

* * *

BID CANCELLED: The first round of Masinloc bidding in 2004 failed because the only buyer, the supposed winner, would not pay the required deposit until it is assured of signing a firm supply contract with a generator or distributor.

In that bidding in 2004, YNN Pacific Consortium offered $560 million. But it failed to deliver the 40-percent up-front payment of $270 million.

The Power Sector Assets and Liabilities Management which oversaw the bidding forfeited YNN’s performance bond of $14 million in July 2006.

Another major transfer of power assets months ago was of Mirant — the biggest independent power producer — selling its assets in the country to a consortium of Tokyo Electric Power and Marubeni Corp.

Lameduck president?

Lameduck president?

IT was apparent President Arroyo was deeply conscious of her having become a lame-duck when she delivered her State of the Nation Address (Sona) last Monday. She was hinting about it in many areas of her speech when she tried to project an image of strength and masculine bravado.

The President, it seems, would rather be called by any other name than a presidential lame-duck, which she is.

When she said that a president can be as strong as she wants to be, she actually appeared to me to be giving due notice that she is free to do anything without fearing political repercussions, and that everyone with politics in mind should be very careful.

She clarified though that she would not stand in the way of one’s ambition but would not allow political jostling in the House and the Senate that would stymie her plans for national economic stability.

Sen. Manny Villar, the new Senate president who was once among her congressional “friends,” now feels Arroyo does not really want to be counted out of the political picture after her term runs out in 2010. Villar said the President sounded defensive in her Sona.

There is no doubting the fact that, in her Sona, the President projected a different kind of tact compared with her six other addresses. The previous ones, while carrying the same veneer of political visions and promises, did not have the forcefulness and bravado the latest one.

It was not reconciliatory but had instead a kind of assertiveness that seemed to lay aside political compromise that in the past she was prone to accept. That was why she appeared indecisive then.

I think it is still too early for the opposition to consider GMA a lame-duck president. A woman nourished in politics since her childhood and used to political intrigues, maneuvers, and horse-trading should know when to make a stand.

She had been playing politics in the past seven years that I think she now feels a sense of guilt. To the President, 2010 is political freedom.

And if I am correct, it would be bad for anyone in the Senate or the House to underestimate what she said in her Sona. More so if she truly meant what she said: that she would not stand in the way of anyone’s ambition.

But she could be a strong president if she wants to, and if pushed to doing so.

There is a touch of fair warning there. If one takes her vow to place the Philippines in a position of becoming a rich country in 20 years, then one should not be one to monkey with her national vision.

Opposition divided

Opposition divided

PRESIDENT Arroyo is extremely lucky. She thinks that she is unpopular for pursuing what she perceived are right decisions but the thing is being detested is not healthy for one's well-being. But luck is with her.

The value of the mighty dollar has plummeted and ergo, like a seesaw, the peso appreciated. I will give her some credit for the resurrection of our currency from the virtual graveyard.

The intelligent faction of the opposition has grudgingly conceded that the e-VAT (expanded value added tax) resuscitated our ailing economy and has reduced the budget deficit. Without disbursing a cent from our coffers, our foreign debt consequently depreciated on account of the rally of the peso against the $.

The nitwits in the opposition of course have nothing good to say for the Arroyo government. Given the fact that poverty still pervades despite all the reputed gains in the economy, it's still fashionable to assail and discredit the Arroyo administration until such time when galonggong starts selling at P9 per kilo.

But Arroyo is blessed with a bunch of opposition who are split right in the middle with no sign of reconciliation. Her remaining rabid critics are Jamby Madrigal and Jinggoy Estrada. With this pair of lightweights who landed in the Senate by a fluke, Arroyo can sleep soundly for now.

The rest of her political adversaries had stopped sniffing the trails of Arroyo. Instead, they are now backstabbing each other and by the crescendo of their diatribes reconciliation is remote. Jamby who loves to parley with communists and with foreign activists and militants is shabbily treating her fellow senators citing them with nasty language as if her peers are as good only as her househelps. Jinggoy finally let out his pent-up emotion and in retort to Ping Lacson’s sanctimonious counsel unleashed a fiery response describing Ping as the "spoiler" of the plot to have the late FPJ win by an overwhelming majority had not the senator ran for the presidency too.

I never realized that Jinggoy has kept that burning grudge against Lacson. I'd say that this sentiment must be deeply engrained in Erap too. Jinggoy just knew too well how sly is the foremost spy that his father had trusted in the past. I must admit that I was wrong all along in my perception that Lacson is still regarded highly by the deposed president. It took only a jibe from Lacson to let loose that pent up emotion from Estrada. In hindsight, we cannot fault Jinggoy for indeed if Lacson withdrew from the race, GMA could have landed in the swamp cabbage despite Garci, and his father could have been liberated from the confines of his detention cell by the stroke of the pen of FPJ.

Jinggoy is hitching his stars with Manny Villar. While Villar is as equally detestable in the eyes of the Estradas for practically railroading the impeachment of Erap in Congress while he was still House speaker, the senate president has indubitably the best chance to winning the presidency after GMA. I think for once, Jinggoy is thinking reasonably. I think he knows what is good for his political health and the fate of his father.

As far as Villar is concerned, he plays his card well. He remains cool. Like Arroyo, he is watching and enjoying the political dogfight of his probable opponents in the coming presidential race. He remains unscathed for now. And for as long as Jinggoy and Jamby are not reined in Villar is on his way to becoming the presidential nominee even before the actual skirmish begins.

While this happens, Arroyo can work on her legacy.

Hits and misses

Hits and misses

PRESIDENT Arroyo delivered the right speech for the right audience at the Batasan. She reported on the economic and political health of the nation. She gave an account of her accomplishments. Her legislative agenda and priorities were made known to the people. And she shared with us her vision of the future. She rose to the occasion.

She envisions the Philippines becoming a rich and modern nation in 20 years. By then, “poverty shall have been marginalized; and the marginalized raised to a robust middle class.”

She gave Congress her legislative list, 10 important bills from reducing the cost of medicines to combating crime and terrorism.

She said her three investment priorities are in the physical, legal, intellectual and security infrastructure to increase business confidence; investments in a stronger and wider social net for education, housing and healthcare; and investments to bring peace to Mindanao.

She spent a great deal of her speech to the five Super Regions that were supposed to spread development away from Metro Manila. That portion was familiar territory because she gave equal space and time to it in her 2006 address.

The President crowed the government is spending P150 billion this year for education, P29 billion more than last year. She failed to say how she would reform basic education, the most critical element of our educational system, next to the deficiencies in science, math and English teaching.

Her report on the war on graft was impressive. However, corruption—as well as police and military lawlessness—could be reined in if the government insists on command responsibility. Few government officials take responsibility for their failures or the misdeeds of their subordinates. The constitutional mandate on accountability is very clear. Few have lived up to their responsibilities.

Her remarks on foreign policy came almost as an afterthought. Toward the end of her address, she said that progress has “imbued” foreign relations, citing the Asean Summit last year and the coming Asean Regional Forum. The foreign dignitaries in the audience must have surprised why she had not discussed foreign policy, what new directions it is taking, and why it is important to the national interest.

The President could have spoken to the young. They should take responsibility for their lives, shunning teen pregnancy, alcohol, smoking, violence, vice and frivolous pursuits. A word on civics and citizenship would have been instructive. For young and adults, she could have preached volunteerism and the fulfillment of civic duties.

We missed a paragraph on improving incomes, ensuring equal pay, raising the minimum wage and improving standards of living. What are the most recent figures on the poverty level, survival below which is difficult for the masses of Filipinos? After all, she said that liberating the poor from hunger and poverty was as important as protecting human rights.

Her speechwriters failed to realize that her audience went beyond the politicians, the generals, the diplomats, the businessmen and the elite at the Batasan. She was expected to address a wider audience—the young, the workers, women, the artists, the ethnic minorities, the poor and the middle class—the national family. They expected to hear from her, about her plans for their future, how they fit into her vision, and their role in the national agenda, which includes not only the economy and politics, but also strengthening the moral fabric, promoting family values and building a decent and civil society.

Joke only?

Joke only?

Last week, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo cracked a joke that had the opposition and her critics seriously thinking about what her real plans are one she steps down from the presidency in 2010. Speaking at the Subic Bay Freeport last Wednesday, Ms Arroyo said: “Who knows? I may run for Congress in my hometown." Then she flashed a wide grin that was shown on national television by the government station NBN.

Opposition Sen. Aquilino Pimentel Sr. said the joke (if it was a joke) “betrayed her intent to stay in power." Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano speculated that she wants to be prime minister in a prospective parliament that would be established through an amendment of the Constitution. He said it makes no sense for her to become a member of the House of Representatives because only a president is immune from prosecution. (Still, a position in Congress -- or in Parliament, in case the Constitution is amended -- would give her a platform from which she can defend herself and possibly avoid a fate similar to that of former President Joseph Estrada.)

If what Ms Arroyo said was not really a joke, then the people have cause to be alarmed and to be afraid. She may be planning to do a Marcos. (President Ferdinand E. Marcos imposed martial law on Sept. 21, 1972, a year before he was to complete his second term as president.) She said in 2002, on the occasion of the martyrdom of Jose Rizal on Dec. 30, that she was not running for election, only to reverse herself in October 2003 and announce that was seeking a full six-year term as president. She ran in 2004 and was proclaimed president although up to now the legitimacy of her presidency remains in question, largely because of the “Hello Garci" issue.

From 2004 up to now, she has spent a great part of her time strengthening her hold on power and shoring up her defenses against continuing challenges to the legitimacy of her presidency. And it is believed that because her position is tenuous, she has come to depend more and more on the military for support. That is why, her critics say, she cannot act more forcefully on the issue of political killings because she would be going against the secret anti-insurgency plans of top military generals.

Depending on one’s viewpoint, Ms Arroyo has already done enough good for the country and she can afford to rest on her laurels in 2010 -- or she has done enough damage and she should finally retire from politics to give other, younger leaders a chance to serve the nation. It should be enough honor for her to be known as the longest-serving president in the post-Ferdinand Marcos period.

Ms Arroyo should take a hint from her approval ratings, which have been consistently low if not negative. The latest survey by the poll group Social Weather Stations, done June 27-30, showed that satisfaction with her has stayed neutral, with 39 percent satisfied and 42 dissatisfied, for a net rating of -3. A Pulse Asia survey in the last three months said 34 percent of the people were critical of Ms Arroyo’s performance, while 30 percent approved of her. She is the only president in the post-Marcos period who has had a long, unbroken string of negative net satisfaction ratings in nearly four years (2004-2007), from a low of -33 in May 2005 to a high of -3 in June 2007.

She should also take a hint from the results of the recent senatorial elections, which, despite the use of a lot of public funds and government machinery and the intensive efforts of leaders and campaigners to make administration candidates win, ended in a 7-3-2 victory for the opposition. Are these signs that the people love and admire her, and would like her to stay in government, or possibly, even lead them again?

Ms Arroyo should know when to stop. It’s a good thing the impeachment move is not being pursued; for one thing, the House of Representatives is firmly under the control of administration congressmen and no such move will prosper there.

She and her political allies should abandon all plans to have the Constitution amended to allow Ms Arroyo to run for member of Parliament, and then, possibly aspire for the post of prime minister.

Ms Arroyo’s announcement that she will run for congressman was a joke? If she does run for congresswoman (or member of Parliament), the joke will be on the long-suffering and long-seething Filipino people.