Saving Grace

Newly appointed Election Commissioner Grace Padaca must feel confused, even disoriented, from the flurry of criticism she has received in the last several days. Her use of President Aquino’s “personal funds” to pay for bail—P30,000 for a graft charge and P40,000 for a malversation charge—has thrust her into the center of a gathering political storm, one that threatens to undermine her reputation as that rare creature: a politician of integrity.

She must be wondering what she did wrong. She has been steadfast in her campaign against corruption; she has been tireless in her championing of good governance; she has not changed political alliances since she entered politics; more to the point, she has not wavered in her fight against the Dy dynasty in Isabela province.

When she heard about the twin charges of corruption and malversation of funds being prepared against her by a surrogate of the Dy family she had tangled with in three gubernatorial elections, she thought (rightly, in our view) that the cases were politically motivated. When the charges were filed, she decided (rightly, in the eyes of many) to protest the manifest injustice by refusing to post bail. When President Aquino, an ally of longstanding, offered to put up the money for her bail last May, she felt (understandably) vindicated. And when Interior Secretary Mar Roxas, president-on-leave of the Liberal Party she belongs to, accompanied her when she finally posted bail last Thursday, she looked serene.

She said: “Hindi lang po ’yung halaga ng pera ang importante dun kundi ’yung ibig sabihin ’yung isang katulad ni Noynoy, isang katulad ni Mar, ay nandito at mas naniniwala ako’y hindi kurakot at walang ninakaw sa mamamayan.” (It’s not just the amount of money that is important [in posting bail] but the significance of someone like Noynoy [President Aquino], someone like Mar [Roxas], [standing] here [by me] and believing that I am not corrupt and did not steal anything from the people.)

We too believe she is not corrupt and did right by her provincemates when she awarded the P25-million priority hybrid rice project that is the subject of the two charges. But something happened between May, when President Aquino first offered to post bail for her, and last week, when she brought the President’s money to the courtroom, in Roxas’ company: She had been appointed to the Commission on Elections.

The appointment itself is not without controversy. Anyone who ran in the previous election cannot be appointed to the election agency; while Malacañang interprets the “previous” election to mean the October 2010 barangay elections, others suggest that the real milestone is the May 2010 national elections, in which Padaca was a candidate. The fact that the former governor is facing criminal charges—even if Padaca and her allies and supporters, the President among them, think these are only a form of political harassment—is also not without moment.

But it is the presumed independence of an election commissioner that is the source and measure of the growing controversy. Many people will ask: How can Padaca be an effective member of the Comelec, if she is perceived as partisan? If she used President Aquino’s own money to bail herself out, surely she will tack the Liberal Party’s way?

Here’s the first of two truths we suggest the Magsaysay awardee take to heart: Even if she had not accepted the President’s offer, she would have been criticized as a politician-appointee anyway; she is the first politician appointed to the Comelec since Gloria Arroyo named Benjamin Abalos. This in itself is not a disqualification; as in the case of the Supreme Court, appointed politicians can rise above politics. In fact, considering her travails with election hijinks, Padaca can be an effective advocate of election reform within the Comelec. But her reputation from here on will depend on her performance.

And the second? Good intentions are not enough. Her appointment to the Comelec changed her relationship with the President, Roxas and other close allies. Nothing suggests that her good intentions, her ambitions for good governance have changed; but the context is now completely different. She should put her trust in a government of laws—not of well-meaning, deep-pocketed gentlemen.