Striptease acts at the Senate

ENQUIRY
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

Striptease acts at the Senate
Sunday, 05 31, 2009

Stripteases used to be performed in pre-martial law Manila in now-defunct theaters that went with names such as Dragon, Playboy and King. Even the venerable Manila Grand Opera House was also used as venue. The “teasing” part involved the titillating slowness of undressing, as the audience salivated to see more exposure. A good stripper had masterful control of delay tactics — she either came onstage with additional clothes and slowly removed them or she coyly put her clothes or hands in front of momentarily exposed body parts.

The whole point was on the act of taking off one’s clothes along with suggestive moves, rather than the state of being naked. In those days, the performance came to a climax, no pun intended, as soon as the undressing was finished.

Today, though, we have striptease artists who continue the act after the exposure has been done, leaving the audience to yell for more. And — surprise! — the venue is no longer in sleazy, dark-lit places in Santa Cruz or Malate, but in the well-lit halls of the Senate in Pasay, where the audience can follow the act in person or live via television.

There was the C-5 striptease, the exposé of Sen. Ping Lacson on the alleged double insertion of P200 million in the national budget. We were appalled that a senator could be so brazen as to use his vast powers to lust after that amount from our coffers. What followed was an appeal to the better judgment of the nation, with the use of media to prove Sen. Manny Villar’s innocence or the truth in Lacson’s exposé. Villar was to be exonerated subsequently by the Senate finance committee.

Just when we thought Villar’s exoneration had written finis to l’affaire C-5, here comes Sen. Jamby Madrigal doing yet another “striptease”: The alleged realignment of a vital road, allegedly instigated by Villar to benefit his abutting properties. We see Madrigal waving her evidence before the Senate Committee of the Whole (SCoW), while Villar brings his case to the people via media, and asks the Supreme Court to intervene to protect his right to equal protection. Villar is gambling on winning the sympathy of the people with his use of media, spurning altogether the rightful venue of the SCoW. A gambler like Villar is taking his chances. Just when this act will reach its climax — whether Villar, exposed as he is, wins his case or the SCoW is proven right in its assertion of jurisdiction — and how it will end, is now a daily, tantalizing fare for the public.

The Madrigal versus Villar act has its sub-plot: The Enrile versus Pimentel exchange as to who the ultimate hypocrite, the real coward, and the better orator is. Here we have two elder statesmen battling with all their might, summoning the ghosts of the past to prove the state of the things of the present. While they remain civil to each other despite insults and razor-sharp barbs they traded with each other, we dread to see what other issue could spark the animosity between the two. We are still being teased by their respective supporting cast as to who between the two posits the firmer, legal arguments. How this will end, and when, we await.

Then we have the coming and going of the senators-presidentiables, a function of the law allowing sitting senators to run for a higher office without forfeiting their seats. So now we have the sordid spectacle of at least eight of the 24-member Senate casting a moist eye on either the presidency or vice presidency. They can afford to be absent from the Senate, and be already out in the hustings this early, exposing themselves, as it were, to the public. Their absence impacts on how legislative business is being carried. And in the rare times they are together in the Senate, one is always expected to upstage the other. And they have clogged our airwaves with itik, padyak, and other inanities that detract our attention from the ills of the nation. This striptease act could go on and on until the Congress adjourns for the electoral campaign in 2010.

And then, we have the sex-video scandal. Slowly, but surely, the Senate is being dragged into this. Not one to pass up a golden chance at publicity, Sen. Bong Revilla exposed, in the guise of fighting for women’s rights, a purely private matter between two consenting adults. I can almost believe what Leina de Legazpi has been saying all along: This is but a diversionary act, to steer away our focus from the ills of the nation. Madrigal, in the glare of the kleiglights, ably steered the committee proceedings, but delved too much on the sinners, not the sin. The questions asked were much too personal, irrelevant as they were to the crafting of legislation to punish voyeurism or the marketing of salacious videos. The hearing at the Senate was a striptease act, milked to the bone by the players-senators. The gallery yelled for more, yes, but at what cost to our psyche? Should not the committee of Madrigal have heeded the plea to go into executive session to get into the salacious bits of the scandal?

A redeeming act is the righteous indignation of Senate President Enrile over the loads being stripped from our cellphones by the giant telcos. It is providential that Enrile was himself the victim of this rip-off. Now the telcos must explain why they have to rob Jose and Maria of the precious pesos otherwise intended to call or text Joss and Mary. Go ahead, SPJPE, and let these thieving telcos squirm. Jose and Maria will cheer in ecstasy.

The Senate adjourns sine die on Wednesday. But the striptease acts continue — never doubt that.

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

The Daily Tribune © 2009

Erap and the clergy

ENQUIRY
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

Erap and the clergy

Sunday, 05 24, 2009

.

In 1998, the clergy said Joseph “Erap” Ejercito Estrada is not fit to run for president. So coordinated and vehement was their objection to Erap’s candidacy that they even went to the extent of issuing pastoral letters that were repeatedly read during the Sunday masses, exhorting the assembled faithful to vote for a candidate who is not what Erap is. Erap, nonetheless, won by a whooping majority of six million votes.

In 2001, at EDSA Dos, the clergy helped oust Erap from the presidency. They figured prominently during the oath taking of Acting President Gloria Arroyo at the EDSA Shrine. [A year before, Pope John Paul II had startled the world when he made a sweeping apology for 2,000 years of violence, persecution and blunders committed by the Catholic Church in the crusades, the massacre of French Protestants, the trial of Galileo and anti-semitism.] Four years after EDSA Dos, the Philippine clergy startled the country by publicly apologizing to Erap for their role in his removal from office in 2001 and their anti-Erapism before that. They said it was a big mistake.

Today, Erap is, by all indications, entertaining serious thoughts to run again for president, and the clergy are seriously saying the same thing they were saying in 1998: Keep out of politics; do not run for president; give others a chance, as if with Erap in the running, the others don’t stand a ghost of a chance at the presidency. Three ranking members of the clergy are even earnestly advising Erap to quit politics for good.

With that public pronouncement against Erap, the clergy have instantly given Erap’s putative candidacy for the May 2010 presidential elections the biggest boost. The clergy, it would seem, has never learned their lesson: the more the clergy flog Erap, the more their flock will gravitate to his side. In spite of know-it-alls in the Philippine political milieu, and in spite all the problems he had faced, Erap seems to enjoy more support from the Philippine grassroots than any other president since Ramon Magsaysay.

The clergy should realize that politics, especially the Philippine kind, is very divisive - and very unkind. Any member of the clergy who actively participates or makes public pronouncements in forums derisive of Erap is automatically transfigured as an adversary to the millions who still cling to Erap as their only hope. I’m sorry, Your Eminences and Your Graces, to report that this is the way the political chips fall in this country.

As it is, pastoral work of the clergy is already a full-time job. It should not be saddled with another full-time preoccupation and passion, such as engaging in politics by deriding the capabilities and qualifications of candidates, which - come to think of it! - is a resurrected form of the once-dreaded Inquisition. Our men of the cloth must heed the words of Pope Benedict XVI, who when he was yet Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger and head of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith, confessed to the sins of the Congregation's predecessor, the Inquisition, when he said: "Even men of the church, in the name of faith and morals, have sometimes used methods not in keeping with the Gospel."

The Philippine clergy need to realize by now that their voice in politics vis-à-vis Erap cannot negate Erap’s charisma with the masses. The clergy are not in touch with the people’s sentiments. They completely ignore the Erap mystique despite his mistakes. With their abysmal reading of what the masses really see in Erap and their unappreciative sense of what Erap can deliver, it is the clergy that must quit politics now and concentrate on things religious and spiritual.

When the clergy speak, they should not speak from a platform of infallibility; rather, they should speak from a becoming modesty to admit that they could be wrong. Thus, when they perorate from their pulpits and demonize Erap for what he had been as president for two and a half years, and that Erap must not be given a try at leading the people for another six years, they should realize that elections for the presidency is a political process, a matter between the electorate and the candidates who put themselves into the crucible of popular choice. The clergy have neither the competence to discern the choice of the electorate nor the moral right to impose on the politician what the latter must do.

The clergy overlook the Constitutional pronouncement that “sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.” Erap is reading it right. With his Pasasalamat sa Masa, which has brought him back to the bosom of the people who catapulted him to the presidency in 1998, Erap appears emboldened to give it one more try. The clamor is there, and it is not for the clergy to counsel Erap to disregard that clamor.

As Chief Justice Reynato Puno had said in Tecson vs. Comelec (G.R. No. 161434 - March 3, 2004), “The better policy approach is to let the people decide who will be the next president, for on political questions, this court may err but the sovereign people will not. To be sure, the Constitution did not grant to the unelected members of this court the right to elect in behalf of the people.”

Paraphrasing that statement in regard to the stance of the clergy toward the candidacy of Erap in the May 2010 elections, it behooves the clergy to let the people decide if they want Erap to be their president again, for on political questions, the clergy may err but the sovereign people will not. To be sure, the Constitution did not grant to the clergy, unelected to any political position, the right to diminish the choices of the people as to who should be their president.

.

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

The Daily Tribune © 2008

Presumptions, assumptions, questions (Villar C5 Scandal)

ENQUIRY
DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

Presumptions, assumptions, questions
Sunday, 05 17, 2009

The refusal of former Senate President Manny Villar to confront his accuser before the Senate Committee of the Whole (SCoW) is not helping him any. For now, everyone can presume Villar to be innocent, possibly relying mainly on his claim that the charge is plain and simple political persecution of a frontrunner in the presidential race. But that presumption of innocence will last only until his accuser starts the formal presentation of her evidence during the adjudicatory proceedings. And as the evidence, if unrebutted by Villar, unravels, the public will make its own judgment.

The proceedings are carried live on national TV. If one goes by what transpired last Thursday — when the counsel of Villar’s accuser made his offer of proof and rattled off the evidence he will present during the adjudicatory proceedings — the public at large, however, disinterested, cannot but conclude that the SCoW will find probable cause to proceed against Villar. That is how cruel a live, unedited coverage of a public function on national TV could be. The truth, as caught live on TV, is what is — stark naked and unadorned — and lays bare what a skillfully crafted press release, infomercial or commentary would otherwise conceal or dissipate.

Seeing Sen. Alan Peter Cayetano present controverting evidence outside of the SCoW, I believe Villar can offer a strong defense. But unless these pieces of evidence are themselves thrown into the crucible of a committee investigation, they will not amount to anything. What will count before the SCoW is the evidence presented before it, and only such evidence. If Villar remains adamant and refuses to give information or answer questions formally before the SCoW, the presumption would be that the evidence he has in his defense rests on shaky ground and could be poked full with holes. (I saw on TV how Villar’s accuser poked holes in that Google map — showing the properties traversed by the realigned road — presented by Cayetano.)

Villar’s absence in the proceedings, or his refusal to submit material evidence available only to him, despite being given the opportunity to produce the same, can only give credence to the niggling presumption that he is suppressing evidence that would otherwise be adverse to him. If he has contrary substantiation, Villar should put them on display — now and before the SCoW. If he presents them well and in full, and yet despite that the SCoW proceeds to crucify him, the public will know that Villar is indeed the victim of his colleagues. And he can parlay that for his run at the presidency.

The senators who sit in the SCoW are presumed to be impartial, except perhaps two who have already spoken unsympathetically of Villar. The remaining 20, including the chairman of the commitee, deserve the benefit of a presumption of impartiality, and are expected to decide on the basis of hard evidence alone. Villar, by snubbing the proceedings, is passing up the golden chance of substantiating his personally held belief that the members of the SCoW are not impartial. I say: If he could, he should — and now!

Cayetano, I hear, says that Villar will confront the SCoW Report when it is presented for approval before the Senate in plenary. That is a no-brainer. What makes Villar believe that the SCoW, where he refuses to appear and participate, is any different from the Senate in plenary? Both bodies have the same members; so, whichever way the SCoW decides, he could expect the Senate in plenary to affirm that decision.

Why Villar is willing to allow the evidence to go unrebutted before the SCoW, and let it decide against him on the basis of the evidence presented before it, puzzles me.

Villar knows that committee reports are taken up in plenary upon a decision of the majority, but what if the majority will not even calendar the SCoW Report for consideration in plenary? Villar will then be saddled with a committee report indicting him for engaging in corrupt acts, and without a forum to rebut the same.

The reality that the senators in the majority can easily muster the required two-thirds votes to discipline him in plenary, should now prompt Villar to summon his much vaunted sipag and submit his evidence at the earliest opportunity. Otherwise, the unrebutted claims of his accuser could very well be the sole basis for the senators in plenary to stiff Villar. The best forum to rebut the accusations against him is still before the SCoW. A committee report indicting him, whether acted upon in plenary, will cause damage that is beyond salvage.

Recourse to a court of law will not give Villar any respite from the public presumption that he does not have solid evidence to rebut the accusation against him. He would only be buying time, they will say, until the campaign period comes around and the Senate goes on recess, rendering everything academic. But will he have the tiyaga to rely on a temporary restraining order of the court putting on hold further proceedings before the SCoW, and endure that protracted public spectacle of mounting evidence against him? Meanwhile, the accusation lingers and malingers, and poor Villar will have to live with that.

The preliminary inquiry conducted last Thursday proceeded in accordance with the rules adopted by the SCoW itself. It was unfortunate that no one represented Villar in the proceedings. It was ill-advised for him to recuse himself from the proceedings and thereby let his accuser convince the senators in attendance of the existence of probable cause against him. Tomorrow the SCoW convenes again to debate the weight of the offer of proof and the evidence presented by Villar’s accuser. He — or his representative — had better be there to present his side.

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

The Daily Tribune © 2008

Miscellany

ENQUIRY

DEMAREE J.B. RAVAL

Miscellany
Sunday, 05 10, 2009

Until now, I still wonder why the rule in many parliaments disqualifying a member (of an ethics committee) from participating in the initial review and investigation of any complaint filed or initiated by him, is not being observed at the Senate. The Senate Rules could be silent on this disqualification rule, but there is always this unwritten rule nonetheless: A member may disqualify himself, at his discretion, e.g., out of a sense of delicadeza. Then, again, in the voting of the Senate committee of the whole, the senator disqualified in the initial review and investigation by reason of his being the complainant or initiator of the complaint subject of the investigation should not have the right to vote.

000---000

Back to manual elections. That is what will happen if the Comelec does not make an award to a winning bidder by May 27. James Jimenez, however, assured us at the Kapihan sa Sulo yesterday that despite the disqualification of all seven bidders, some of them could still qualify well upon a motion for reconsideration. The bidder who upgrades its credentials by bringing in a new member to the consortium — even if that new member be a parent company to an original member of the consortium — should be disqualified outright.

000---000

At the rate the presidentiables are clogging our television sets with their infomercials — the frequency was most scandalous and criminal during the Pacquiao-Hatton fight — it is time for the Comelec, and not tomorrow, to set up the guidelines in accordance with the Fair Elections Act.

000---000

Sen. Nene Pimentel has this to say about party-list Rep. Jovito Palparan: “Palparan’s proposal to revive the anti-subversion law is reflective of his antediluvian mentality toward law and order in a modern democratic society. His record as a general in the field of human rights speaks for the kind of attitude he has toward those who have a different view of governance even if they do not bear up arms in rebellion. In a word, the general-turned-congressman poses a clear and present danger to the civil liberties of the people."

000---000

Martin Nievera can rest easy: He will not be prosecuted for bastardizing the Philippine National Anthem in Las Vegas. There is the territoriality principle in criminal law, which simply means that one cannot be prosecuted in the Philippines for a crime not committed within its territorial jurisdiction.

000---000

The Senate passed a resolution commending Manny Pacquiao for his spectacular victory over Hatton. Senator Pimentel managed to convince his colleagues to note in the resolution Pacquiao’s humility and prayerfulness, two virtues that are absent in many other super athletes and individuals in-or-out of government. Did you notice that Pacquiao in his pre-fight interviews never swaggers that he will win and that he always leaves everything to God’s will? And Pacquiao always dedicates his victory to God?

000---000

In the US, they have Obama. In the Philippines, we have Omama. How our colleague Neal Cruz can be so funny while being inventive.

000---000

The arrest of veteran broadcaster Cheche Lazaro for alleged violation of the Anti-Wiretapping Law is insane. It is plain harassment and intimidation. Since when has pursuing the truth, which Cheche did with her report (in behalf of schoolteachers) on irregularities in the GSIS, become actionable? Cheche interviewed her source at the GSIS, with the latter knowing fully well (and with her consent) that the interview was being taped and that it would be made public. Where is the crime there?

000---000

Former Sen. Agapito “Butz” Aquino is being mentioned as a senatoriable. That is good news. The Senate misses this “Father of Filipino Cooperatives.”

000---000

The Sandiganbayan has found two lawyers guilty of Indirect Contempt, and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of P30,000 and suffer six months of imprisonment. The lawyers, one of them the president of a chapter of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines, caused the entry “Cash for Sandiganbayan TRO – 2,000,000” in the books of a corporation, which entry caught the interest of the Senate blue ribbon committee investigating the plunder of the assets of that corporation. The Sandiganbayan found the entry to be “unquestionably and highly contemptuous” and “tends to cast aspersion upon the integrity of the (court) and thereby degrades the administration of justice.”

000---000

There is hope in the public bureaucracy, if we go by what the Quezon City District Office of the Land Transportation Office (LTO) is exhibiting. The office premises are clean and well-maintained; its personnel courteous and efficient; and its system of delivery of services well-organized. My son lost his driver’s license, and so had to go to the LTO along P. Tuazon Street. He got his replacement license in just 30 minutes, despite the big number of registrants. Special mention goes to the personnel all of whom were working — I did not see anyone idle, combing hair, applying make-up, reading newspapers, etcetera. My son got their names: Jaime Bacani, Ailene Borillo, Raquel Maniego and Bessy Dollison. Congratulations!!!

000---000

Happy Mother’s Day to the mother of Kathryn Monica, Kristin Melissa, Kenneth Marius, and Kevin Michael; and to the grandmother of Kaitlyn Giulianna.


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

The Daily Tribune © 2009