The turnout of warm bodies at the people power rally last Feb. 29 in Makati City lagged behind intentions of support for calls for the resignation of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo over the $329-million national broadband network (NBN) scandal, as indicated in recent public opinion poll surveys.
In its latest survey, conducted from Feb. 21 to 24, on the eve of the 22nd anniversary of the 1986 People Power Revolution, the poll group Pulse Asia found that 69 percent of respondents in Metro Manila would support protest actions calling for the resignation of government officials. However, out of the 69 percent who supported demonstrations, only 16 percent said they would join the rallies, while 53 percent said they would not. Asked why they would not join the rallies, 26 percent said they had ?more important things to do,? another 26 percent said there would be no change in government, 21 percent said they needed to earn a living, 7 percent said, there was no alternative leader, and 6 percent said they were ?tired? of people power.
The turnout at last Friday?s rally underscores the need for caution in relying on expressions of support for political movements. It shows that there?s a long way to go before intentions, reported in opinion polls, translate into political action.
The survey also showed that 61 percent of Metro Manila residents believed there was a ?big possibility? that the testimony of Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr., key witness at the Senate investigation in the NBN deal would lead to the downfall of the Arroyo government. There?s also the danger of miscalculation that Lozada?s testimony alone would topple the regime, although the same survey found that 65 percent of Metro Manila residents considered him a ?credible? witness at the Senate inquiry. His credibility is now being attacked, and questions have arisen as to whether most of his testimony is based on hearsay and whether this can be a firm anchor upon which to build a new people power movement. Public opinion is notoriously fickle.
The survey helps explain why the large turnout expected by organizers of the Feb. 29 interfaith in Makati City did not materialize. Crowd estimates ranged from 15,000 to 80,000. Police estimates tended to understate the count, and anti-government groups tended toward the larger estimates. The latter emphasized that the rally was the largest street protest action against the government since the Senate started investigating the cancelled NBN contact with China?s ZTE Corp. more than five months ago. This claim is verifiable. Protest groups interpret the 80,000 turnout as a sign that the call for the President?s resignation is gaining momentum.
The survey finding leads to the question: why is there a big gap between the 69 percent who would support the call for Ms Arroyo?s resignation and the 53 percent who won?t take to the streets. What will it take the unwilling to decide to take the big leap of commitment and join the street protests? More of Lozada?s testimony, or more direct evidence from former socioeconomic planning secretary Romulo Neri, who has been gagged from testifying by Executive Order 464 on the more sordid corruption aspects of the NBN deal? What more evidence does the public need to spark a mass insurrection like that of People Power I?
Even though the Makati turnout on Feb. 29 failed to meet the expectations of people power enthusiasts, the Pulse Asia survey underlined the importance of crowd turnout as a more sensitive measure of the public mood rather than intentions indicated by the opinion polls. It is still the growing mass of warm bodies in the streets that warns the government that the people?s anger is edging close to flash point.
The size of the crowd seemed to have rattled the administration more than the disheartened civil society protest groups. The administration did not spare any of its coercive police powers to prevent the Feb. 29 rally from turning into a mammoth demonstration of public unrest. Police checkpoints at the North and South Expressway entries to Metro Manila blocked provincial delegations from joining the rally. They also blocked academics, students and other protest groups from congregating in Makati. The police and the military declared the Makati Central Business District a no-fly zone, banning private TV networks from flying helicopters to take aerial photos of the rally. The purpose was to deny the TV audience evidence of swelling street marches.
Without these restrictions, it?s possible the turnout would have been larger. Thus such restrictions gave the government a false picture of the extent of the public outrage, causing it to underestimate its risks. The curbs amounted to suppression of the free flow of information (print or visual) on public events. They are the same as the suppression of evidence on the testimony of witnesses to the NBN deal, through Executive Order 464.
There?s little evidence that public unrest is waning as a result of the curtailment of information not only in the Senate hearings but also in protest movement. The more the government deflates the extent of the unrest, the more it puts itself at risk of the crisis exploding in its face. Curtailment is stoking the flames of unrest. Protest groups need not do more. Suppression is recruiting more warm bodies to join the street marches. The suppression of evidence during the impeachment trial of Joseph Estrada, which sparked People Power II, should serve as a warning to all.
