Adulterated victory
Will the charge that P-Noy is coddling allies dilute the impact of the indictment of Johnny Ponce Enrile, Jinggoy Estrada and Bong Revilla?
No and yes.
An equivocation doubtless, but not an unjustified one. There are all sorts of angles, or nuances, here.
The charge of course was made by the thousand or so activists who marched to Liwasang Bonifacio last Thursday to press for freedom from pork. Indicting the three senators is all very well, they said, but what about the others? Specifically, what about Butch Abad and Proceso Alcala who have been linked to the pork scam by Janet Napoles herself? “We are here to express our outrage over the current system… over government’s lack of political will in prosecuting the many plunderers who have emptied government coffers, who have stolen from the people. What we want is to hold everyone involved accountable.”
President Aquino clearly had this at the back of his mind when he spoke in Naga City at the Independence Day rites. There was nothing political in the indictment of the three senators. “We could have done this in haste without any strong basis just to destroy the names of those linked to the controversy… But we followed the correct process. We opened an investigation, gathered evidence, and ultimately filed charges.”
Is P-Noy believable when he says this?
Yes. In so far as this goes, he has nothing to worry about. The notion that he had partisan political interests in mind when he went after the three senators will not find many converts. This has been altogether an exceedingly popular move, as seen easily from its obverse side, which is Bong Revilla’s exceedingly unpopular speech last week, where he tried to depict his and his fellows’ impending incarceration as an attempt by government to undermine the opposition. Most people have little doubt about P-Noy’s impartiality in this case—they were his allies after all in the impeachment of Renato Corona. As with Corona, most people have little doubt about their guilt.
To belabor the point, this is what distinguishes Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s prosecution of Joseph Estrada and P-Noy’s prosecution of the three senators. In the first, naked self-interest was patent: Arroyo’s survival depended on doing away with Erap. In the second, who the hell cares about the so-called opposition? To go by the 2000 and 2013 elections, it existed only in the minds of the losers. Why want to do anything about an entity that is bent on self-destructing?
The fact that the three senators have been indicted, which makes it possible for them to be arrested anytime, negates the idea that government lacks the political will to prosecute plunderers. Arguably, it’s not all the plunderers, arguably it does not include—or hasn’t as yet included—government allies. But you’ve got to start somewhere, and indicting the three senators (and sundry congressmen) who first figured in the scam is the best place to start. First come, first served. Not quite incidentally, it wasn’t government that put them first in line, it was the exposés, not least the Inquirer’s. If this does not dispel the charge of selective justice, it at least greatly diminishes it.
But now comes the tricky part. Government hasn’t yet investigated and prosecuted possibly erring allies. But the question is: Will it ever do it? That’s where government’s resolve to ferret out and punish all evildoers falls under a cloud of doubt.
Arguably, no ample, detailed, and unassailable evidence has been laid out against P-Noy’s allies, in particular Abad and Alcala. Other than the word of Napoles herself. But you can always show at least an openness to investigate it. More than that, you can always bestir yourself to investigate it. After all, you believed Napoles when she said those things against Johnny, Jinggoy and Bong. Which brings us to the real problem, one that hasn’t escaped the general public, quite apart from the activists.
Attitude.
The attitude specifically of being loath to touch allies. No, more than that, the attitude specifically of dismissing accusations against them and defending them to death. It’s knee-jerk. It’s reflex. Look at the way P-Noy himself greeted Napoles’ revised version of her list, which included Abad and Alcala. Which was to sweep it aside and say Napoles was simply trying to confuse the issue to divert the public’s attention from the three senators. For reasons only she can say, which are likely unsavory.
Is it possible? Yes. Jun Magsaysay had nothing to do with it and found his name there. But the unwillingness to even look, let alone askance, at the other names is pretty telling.
Indeed, look at the swiftness and vigor with which government defends allies when the evidence against them is fairly formidable. Al Vitangcol was accused by the Czech ambassador of trying to extort money from them and Edwin Lacierda came out swinging—at the Czech ambassador. The ambassador, he said, was just pissed off that a compatriot of his didn’t get a train contract. How many administrations, including Gloria Arroyo’s, has had officials that were openly accused by an ambassador of extortion? And did nothing about it?
I’ve no problems with focusing on Enrile, Estrada and Revilla. I’ve said it again and again, first things first. But that principle draws its validity and power only from another principle, which is, second things second. Jailing the three senators will be satisfying—and educational—in that it is not politically motivated and went through due process. But not even entertaining that possibility for allies will be unfulfilling—and obfuscating—in that it will taint it with suspicions of selective perception, selective resolve, selective justice.
It will be a victory, but a much adulterated one.
