A shame campaign (Part 3)

E·N·Q·U·I·R·Y
DEMAREE RAVAL

A shame campaign (Part 3)
Sunday, 10 12, 2008

Shame them, in whatever form and manner.

In effect, that’s what Transparency International did to the Philippines when it rated the country with a 2.3 mark on a scale of 1-10 and placed it 141st among 180 countries in its Corruption Perception Index. Of course, the ratings are not fair – those shameful figures do not reflect our own integrity as a people, but only applies to the crooks in the government.

For a while, we thought the government was doing something about it when it announced that it had upped the ante against crooks, whether petty or big-time, in the government through a lifestyle check that exposes suspected corrupt public officials having properties manifestly out of proportion to their legitimate income.

But it was all a show. Worse, the government even tried to besmirch the integrity and character of well-meaning whistle-blowers. Look at what they are doing to Jun Lozada.

All the more, let us not be cowed. Through the media, in public forums, even in conversations with friends, let us continue expressing our disgust.

Heap shame, then, on that clerk who was merely in charge of processing bills of lading at the customs zone, and could not explain where she got the wherewithal to build her multi-million house in some upscale, gated community. After having been charged in court, she conveniently took a leave. A permanent one, from the looks of it, as now she is nowhere to be found, probably now in some secret place to live out the rest of her life in fear of being discovered and scorned by her honest colleagues.

Put to public shame, too, that government official – a big fish who has thrived far too long in the corruption pond – who was said to have made a killing in the purchase of faulty and unusable electronic voting machines that are now rusting in peace in some obscure warehouse. More shame on him when he was exposed to have extracted a hefty million-dollar bukol to facilitate another deal, never mind if he resigned in tearful indignity from his powerful position, unable to bear the daily bashing he was getting from everyone.

Rake over the coals, also those officials who with straight face claim there is only minimal corruption, all the while blaming media for the perception that corruption has reached gargantuan proportions.

Public shame and disgrace is even a fatal punishment. As in the case of the bureau director supervising the construction of public highways, who through kickbacks and large “gifts” from contractors was able to maintain a Swiss bank account that enabled his wife and children to drive around town in their respective customized SUVs and take regular trips to the best resorts abroad, the shame of exposure drove him to the end of his tether. He landed in the front pages, in a photo showing his tongue in the grotesque rictus of death, his feet a foot or two above the floor, swaying in the wind.

Against questions of constitutionality, a shame campaign ranged against the principles of presumption of innocence or against libel laws should be upheld as an extension of the public’s right to information and exercise of free speech. That should put to rest any doubt about the legality of its implementation.

A shame campaign, alongside the appropriate penal laws, it itself the punishment for corruption. It is not some process that has to go through the procedural stages of proving the guilt of innocence of, say, the giver and the taker of a bribe when they are caught in the very act of wrongdoing. The verdict is instantaneous, and both parties know that they are guilty. That is the beauty and efficacy of a shame campaign. It works. Instantaneously.

We should, however, be aware that for a shame campaign to be waged successfully against the purveyors of corruption, it must be implemented with impartiality. The selective implementation of any shame campaign – where the thrust is merely on the overt and merely pedestrian instances of corruption instead of the grand larceny, extortion and robbery of the people’s money – would only encourage the really corrupt elements of society – the lawmaker who takes and gives grand bribes, the judicial officer who hands out decisions for a fee, the relatives and friends of high officials with a passion for kleptocracy – to operate with impunity.

Fortunately, this aberration prevails mostly in the government-initiated campaigns. That is to be expected: Government is famous for protecting those in the higher ranks in order to assure its survival. But, then again, at the very least we shall have eliminated three-fourths of those who prey on the public of rendition of services for a fee. The deterrent effect is there, whatever else one may say about the selectivity.

Shame them. Spare no one. With the public and media prying into their daily lives, and exposing those who cannot explain their sudden wealth and luxurious lifestyles, these perpetrators of graft and agents of corruption are stopped dead on their tracks.

A public shaming is a punishment worse than death. When honor and personal integrity are held as the noblest virtues of an individual, a miscreant would rather commit an act of self-destruction than live a life of ostracism. A shame campaign tugs at the conscience and pricks it; it riles the feelings and makes one feel totally despicable, worthless and beyond redemption. In a shame culture, a person who breaks the law would wish to sink into the ground and disappear forever from view, to hide from those who have borne witness to his embarrassment and disgrace.

Shame them, and shame them further. It should work. If it does not, shame on us as a people and may God have mercy on our insensitive, unfeeling selves.




For comments about this website:Webmaster@tribune.net.ph

The Daily Tribune © 2008