FORMER SENATOR Francisco Tatad’s filing in the Commission on Elections of a petition to disqualy Sen. Grace Poe from the 2016 presidential race brought the running total (of such requests, or should we say “demands”) to two in a row.
Then comes a third (not necessarily expected to be the last) by Antonio Contreras of De La Salle University (“DLSU prof files 3rd DQ case against Poe,” Front Page, 10/21/15), purportedly intended to clear the air of any misconception in Poe’s camp that partisan malice colors the earlier petitions; after all, this professor is no politician.
There was also this report that “former senator Richard Gordon disclosed in a television interview… that members of Roxas’ Liberal Party (LP) and Binay’s United Nationalist Alliance (UNA) had asked him to join an effort to take Poe out of the 2016 presidential race” (“Mar, Jojo asked to stop allies on Grace DQ case,” News, 10/21/15).
Can it be assumed that there appears to be a trend here? So how can it not appear that the primary objective of whoever is behind these moves is to weaken the resolve of Poe in her presidential quest, and the enthusiasm of her supporters to push her candidacy? Everybody knows that Poe is consistently way ahead of her nearest rival in all poll surveys. Thus, rife is the suspicion that all the disqualification petitions against her are politically motivated.
Furthermore, we know for a fact that no such case comes to a simple end in the Commission on Elections or in the Senate Electoral Tribunal. These two bodies may decide fast. But we know for a fact that the losing side in any
of these cases would most likely elevate their cause to the Supreme Court, where, again, it would take a long time to reach final resolution.
Can we take some insight from King Solomon’s wisdom in dealing with disputes: Two women were fighting over an infant, each claiming the child to be hers. The king ordered the child to be split into two so both of them could be given half.
We can only imagine what their constitution looked like during that time, that is, if they already had one then. But a strong voice of conscience—inherent in the real mother and never found in a pretentious one—prevailed. And we all know what happened next.
Should a DNA test ever result (soon?) in Poe’s favor, would she be given a fair chance to run for president or would she be harassed up to the very end? Her detractors doubt her integrity; some who want to push the issue further question her loyalty and allegiance to our country. If we look at both sides, then whose ethics and morality are more debatable—hers or the complainants’ and the political machinery behind them?
Where now are our scruples as a people? What would our national conscience now say? Would vox populi be heard and honored?
—ARMANDO LIBRANDO ALPAY, c/o judithalpay@yahoo.com