Youngblood : First things first
Paolo Raynor E. Salvosa
Inquirer News Service
SINCE I first heard the "Hello, Garci" tapes, I've harbored a deep anger. My friends no longer bring up the issue when I'm around, lest I erupt in fury. But while I cannot let the issue rest, just like many other Filipinos, I was confused about what to do until I discussed it with my father. He told me it was not just a matter of thinking things through, but thinking about the right things.
Contrary to what many people think, the opposition did not make the situation worse. The crisis did not start when the opposition exposed the tape. It started when the people began noticing the suspicious behavior of Malacañang officials, which made them look like they were hiding something.
At first, President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo kept her silence about the tapes, tapes that strongly suggest that she manipulated the elections in her favor. Then, there was the "Bunye fumble." Next, Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez started threatening everyone with imprisonment even if they just listened to the tapes. And things reached the breaking point when the President apologized on national television for her "lapse in judgment."
If there is anything that the political crisis has put in focus, it is not just the lack of accountability of our public officials but the need to hold them to higher ethical standards, especially if she happens to be the President. Public officials are not only supposed to be competent but, more importantly, they are supposed to be people of integrity.
I would choose an honest farmer for president over an intelligent but corrupt politician, any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Because at the end of the day, you can trust the honest farmer who lacks political skills and economic savvy to do his best to serve the nation in accordance with the Constitution. A corrupt politician, on the other hand, can hardly do anything good for the country. Case in point: Cory Aquino vs. Ferdinand Marcos, housewife vs. lawyer (unless you are stupid to think we were better off under Marcos, of course).
The issue confronting us now goes beyond the question of the President's innocence or guilt. It revolves around trust, the heart of the social contract between the government and the people. Hence the phrase, "Public office is public trust."
The President betrayed that trust when she went on TV and apologized for her "lapse in judgment." The people wanted her to speak up and explain the contents of the tapes, hoping to be given simple yes or no answers to their questions. But when she spoke up, she never gave clear answers. She insulted our intelligence by not naming the official as if it was irrelevant. Her declaration that she did not cheat cannot be believed unless she gives a credible explanation for the conversations caught on the tapes.
Her statement consisted of half-truths and in so doing, she betrayed the public trust. And for this, there can be no room for understanding or leniency precisely because she is the President.
I have heard people, mostly administration officials, say that it is the system that is the source of our problems. While that may be true to a certain degree, the system cannot be blamed entirely for any individual's actions. Statements such as, "You can put the pope in Malacañang and he will still fail because the system will make him fail," or "A bad system breeds bad politicians," are self-defeating. To argue this way is to shirk responsibility.
Certainly, removing Ms Arroyo from the presidency will not solve all our problems. The system is very much in need of reforms. But first things first, and first, Ms Arroyo has to go. The campaign for reforms cannot move forward without integrity in government.
Political unrest and division are growing, legislation has been put on hold, and the economy is no longer being given full attention. To make matters worse, violence may be looming on the horizon. The New People's Army, Moro Islamic Liberation Front and other militant groups are stepping up their operations to take advantage of the situation. And very soon, the military might be dragged into the equation and we might enter a period of greater violence and turmoil. The precious, little progress we have made could simply go down the drain. The President put her own interests above those of the nation when she refused to resign in spite of these inevitable consequences.
At this point, any worthwhile discussion should just revolve around how we will boot out a President who is desperately using the system to hang on to her office. But whatever action we decide on must be guided by the Constitution. This means that the constitutional succession of Vice President Noli de Castro must be assured the moment the presidency becomes vacant.
I do not like De Castro. I did not vote for him. But only Ms Arroyo deserves to be kicked out. No individual or group has the right to set aside the votes of millions of Filipinos who elected De Castro simply because he thinks he is "unfit" or it will not change things.
Putting anyone else as president would violate the Constitution and be another betrayal of public trust.
Furthermore, any action we take to rectify the situation must be non-violent. That means our only options are people power or impeachment. Otherwise we set a precedent for the use of violence in resolving future political controversies. If we cannot have a dialogue without guns, then we cannot really have a dialogue at all.
And then what? Unfortunately there is no foolproof plan that will get us out of the hole we are in. The most we can do is draw up a good plan, have faith and proceed step by step.
Paolo Raynor E. Salvosa, 20, is a Bachelor of Arts in European Studies senior at the Ateneo de Manila University.
