It surprises me how I've become this person, who believes in thing thing called ethics and these weird morals. How is it that I have become this person who actually wants to give the very small doses of hope that the recent changes in the government has brought about the benefit of the doubt?
Maybe I've elevated myself to some new ethical level? Or maybe, most of the people I know have become more cynical. Hey, I used to be the jaded one. I used to be the cynic in most relationships that I know of. What has happened to me?
Throughout the Corona trial various arguments from various people with opposing views have come up and I would just like to put my answers out there, whether or not they will ever see my point or agree with me.
So, here are some of the arguments I've heard and what I think about them:
Carpio vs. Corona, and the idea of replacing a bad man with a worse man
As I told a friend of mine, I’ve taken Carpio out of the equation with regards to the trial.
Maybe if Carpio became GMA’s appointed one, and not Corona, he would have done more of her dirty work and he would have been the one in this situation, I acknowledge that.
But that’s the thing, he ended up not getting chosen, and he ended up probably getting bitter and mad about it like everyone says, but then, if he becomes the next justice, then he ended getting lucky, he would be given a chance to play the hero.
If he is given this chance, I would assume that he would actually be committed to the cause for a while, and really, why would he pass up the chance to look good like this? If given a chance to turn his image around, wouldn't he at least try he play his role well?
Well, who knows, after all, didn't this happen before, to GMA? She was handed a chance to play the role of a hero after Edsa 2, after the people turned on Erap, but she fell so short and she was actually worse than Erap.
That’s the thing, we replace a bad person with another person, hoping that the replacement would do better. We hope that this new person would do things right and we try to have faith that this new person would uplift the situation. As isn’t it at the core of the desire for change is the desire for things to improve. Otherwise, why do we even bother?
But, hey, nothing is for certain. We do our best and hope for the best. Sometimes they turn out right, sometimes they turn out wrong.
But if we don’t make a change, just because we say that the alternative could be worse, such as the case for insisting to keep Corona because Carpio might be worse, then it is also equivalent to saying that we are willing to accept the status quo and accept no change. Worse, we’ve let the abstract possibility of a worse situation to hold us back and to just accept an ongoing concretely bad situation.
Everybody is doing it – part of the Miriam argument
If you get caught doing something wrong and you use this as an excuse, well it’s not an excuse.
As the saying goes: just because everyone is doing it, doesn't make it right. It just makes you the unfortunate fellow who got caught in the act with his hand in the cookie jar or some crumbs trailing you around (as the case may be here).
And, if the people who prosecuted you or turned you in have some skeletons in their closet too, well, then they are hypocrites but that still doesn’t make you a saint. You are still guilty.
Politics, Not the Law
“Napupulitika lang”. This is just politics and not just about the law or so they say. So what then? Do we really expect that politics won’t be involved? This is the impeachment of a chief justice who’s a notable ally of GMA, it’s televised for the whole country to see – What?! You think there’s no politics?
But even if it’s about politics as well as about the law, what does it really change? This person should still be held accountable and not be let off just because it involves politics.
It is a witch-hunt, it's bullying (Corona)
Everyone knew that he was an ally of GMA and that he was doing her work. The prosecution knew he had things to hide, even if they were not as prepared.
As mentioned, the goal was to hold the GMA administration and Corona, a GMA appointee, was blocking this goal.
Even if there was a witch hunt, if nothing could be found, then nothing will be found. And, Corona as a grown man, complete with his crude language and threats, and his top position of a branch of a government branch, does he look like someone who can actually be bullied? His “kawawa” looks doesn't fool me. I can’t say that it fooled a lot of people either.
Improper filing SALN, a minor fault not worthy of being impeached
It’s just the wrong declaration - BUT he is the Chief Justice, but it is no small amount.
Some said that by virtue of lawyering technicalities, they side with the defense since the process was haphazardly done and the prosecution was very sloppy.
Never mind that anonymous or not, what the “sources” revealed proved to be more right than wrong. The bank account numbers were correct, USD accounts existed, undeclared properties existed, etc. – he had admitted to having $2.4M and P80M vs. his P3M+ declaration. And, this is the truth (or part of the truth, who knows if he has more hidden wealth -it’s probable).
I remember from Pia Cayatano’s explanation of her vote that she said that while the issue was just an improper filing of the SALN, we are not talking of a minor error. It’s not a case of a few pesos or say, just a parking lot space of a condo unit that was inadvertently forgotten. It was a case of only filing about 2% of his entire revealed cash levels and that's not minor at all.
To acquit him based on lame reasoning like – hey, it’s good faith because his interpretation of the SALN is that he doesn’t need to report his USD because of the secrecy law and hey, his other funds are co-mingled – simply isn’t be acceptable.
 |
| Got curious, so looked for a screenshot of that famous PowerPoint from the ombudsman |
Even if it was simply an improper filing of SALN, it is impossible to look at it as simply that.
In the end, the public had seen a glimpse of the discrepancy and how glaring it really was and more significantly, the public had witnessed the behavior, strategy and character of Corona and his camp.
Truly, more than the technicalities, it was how he performed and how he put himself out there that made it impossible for him to win.
It was how he tried to cover up his sins, how he accused and threatened everyone, how he used crude language, how he behaved, how he walked out, how he pretended to be hospitalized and how he defended himself with the infamous “palusots” that made him lose the game.
Prosecution was so sloppy and so weak
Yes, they were very sloppy. I wished they performed better. I hoped they were more prepared. But they didn't give a stellar performance and they weren't really that prepared.
But this doesn’t change the fact that Corona is GMA’s man and if he remains in position the goal of making her liable will never happen. Their incompetence also doesn’t change the fact that Corona did not file his SALN correctly and only reported about 2% of his total revealed funds.
At the end of the day, despite the prosecution’s incompetence and despite the defense’s top quality team that included the infamous Cuevas, Corona’s true colors still shown through. The defense team’s brilliance was not enough to win it for him. And, in spite of the prosecution’s poor performance, they won.
In the end, the defense put the ombudsman and Corona on the stand. Both moves just won the case for the prosecution. And, Corona was his own worse witness.
So, in spite of the prosecution’s poor performance, they inevitably won. All in all, the win should not be attributed to the prosecution's prowess (because they had almost none). The situation was just a testament to how very little the Corona side had to work on after all. Ultimately, Corona's top notch team could only come up with palusot reasons and had been reduced to pulling various stunts and maneuvers to shift the attention from the real issues so hey, their case was also somewhat weak as well.
Constitutional Crisis
Constitutional Crisis – the catch phrase that the judiciary lets out every time it thinks it’s being conquered by the executive branch. If the judicial branch were playing nice to begin with and at the very least was being mildly cooperative, there wouldn't have been a need to deal with them in the first place.
They are saying with this phrase that they will not back off, so you (executive) back off, otherwise there will be a constitutional crisis. But it goes both ways, if the judiciary “backs off” – i.e. cooperates, then there wouldn't be a need for any of it, there wouldn’t be a threat called constitutional crisis.
The point is, it is not just the executive branch that’s triggering a constitutional crisis if there was to be such as thing, the judiciary is equally responsible for it. So, this whole thing about the judiciary accusing the executive of this thing and threatening everyone that there will be this constitutional crisis is part gaslight-ing and part thug-gery as well.
And hey, good thing JPE finally said it in this interview that I saw on ANC, that if the judiciary insists on not abiding by the Senate’s impeachment of Corona then they will stand up and fight them. Great.
This is a dictatorship, is this martial law?
Dictatorship, martial law – words that have been uttered in an accusatory manner by Corona, his wife and I think, was it Mike Arroyo? Or was it Iggy? (It was one of them)
Well, to call Pnoy’s term akin to a martial law is largely ridiculous. First off, he was voted legitimately by the people.
Next, the platform of his campaign is anti-corruption and is about holding GMA liable for her sins, her corruption.
As everyone one already knows, before GMA left office she strategically situated her people in various government positions, including the controversial SC chief justice position (during the ban) to ensure that when she is out of office it will take the next president a tremendous amount of effort to hold her accountable for anything. And, just to seal the deal, she ran for congress as well. Never mind that it is unconventional and just desperate to go from president to congresswoman.
So, you know, Pnoy’s quest to get her people out and get his people in has more to do with cleaning house than any plans for a dictatorial rule.
Add to this, any quest for change would need the involvement of all the branches of government. If all branches of government are at odds with each other, then nothing will move forward. All is well and good if GMA controlled segments would miraculously cooperate with the current administration but this will obviously not happen. There is no other choice but to get her people out and get his people in for any changes to happen.
We don’t really want a government that has been made impotent by the last regime’s clever schemes. So, here’s to hoping that the current government’s good intentions will soon be enforceable after they've done enough cleaning.
Moreover, other factions, not only GMA’s, are likewise threatened of the growing control of Pnoy over the government. To accuse the current government of a dictatorship because of this reason is rooted in politics and self-interest as well.
As I always say, in group projects and in most anything else, I don’t mind following a leader and having this person in control of the situation if this leader is doing things right (and in this case, is standing for and is trying to clean up the government).
I am thinking here as a mere citizen and, perhaps, this is my self-interest.
I am not a politician who has to think about my shrinking place in the political scene so I do not mind this alleged control, if at the end of the day, it will lead us all to a better place.
I want to be hopeful. I am, of course, still very skeptical but I welcome this shred of hope over having no sign of it at all, which was the case in GMA's time.
I am not expecting anything miraculous, just a slight move forward.
