Loudest & longest applause

The prolonged clapping for President Macapagal-Arroyo when she said, "Our policy is to support the fair and speedy trial of all the accused involved in the cases against President Joseph Estrada" ought to dispel any doubts about the people’s mood. It was an eye-opener for me, too. Like most newspaper readers, I am sometimes seized by doubts about the Filipino’s capacity for justice. After all, Erap is out of power. The easier way out and therefore preferred by Filipinos is to avoid pain. Or so I thought. But that was not the message of the long and loud applause. On the contrary, it was a very pointed message to President Macapagal-Arroyo that she is saying the right thing and that is, for justice to be done. That the applause was loudest for this portion of her speech against what one would think are equally pressing economic matters demonstrate the ordinary Filipino’s keen sense of justice. What that audience wanted to say was there might be other pressing and important problems, but a fair and speedy trial for Erap has priority. It reminded me of the time of Webb’s conviction. Practically every one who had access to television waited and watched with bated breath for the reading of the conviction, if justice would be served. It was the same with the impeachment and Senate trial.

* * *

Last Monday, I was seated on the top rung of the gallery section, hardly the VIP section in the Session Hall but as those around me clapped they also looked and nodded at each other in both encouragement and agreement that what President Arroyo was saying was "the most important thing to them." I would describe most of those in that part of the crowd as probably lower middle class, employees with meager salaries and trying to make both ends meet. Still justice mattered more to them.

* * *

I would also be more hesitant from hereon to believe opinion that we would offend the masa if we make Erap accountable before the law because he is so popular with them. This is founded on a myth. If they had sympathy for him, if they voted for him, it was only because they thought of him as someone who could help them. After Erap’s two years in office, they know better. Alas, he is now out of power and unable to help them. The myth could only thrive if he was in power. That also answers why there are less and less protesters and rallyists for him. Moreover, because he is out of power, there will be no enthusiasm for the likes of a Manalo or a Velarde to trade their crowds for political and economic favors. It is my opinion that this trade-off was more what the May 1 crowds were about than it was a "peaceful revolution of the poor". This is not to say that the poor have no legitimate grievances in Philippine society. They do. But let us not distort the truth about May 1 and how it came about. I think we are barking at the wrong tree when we blame the masses for having elected Erap. Instead we should examine close how Erap preached a position to be put into power. Before he was elected by the masa (where numbers count), he was first made a candidate and that did not come from the masa. The masa are too powerless to be powerbroking. That was the exclusive affair of those rich enough and powerful enough to make him a candidate.

* * *

That is why the person to watch is Noli de Castro, the guy who gave the vote to Franklin Drilon. If Noli de Castro becomes a presidential candidate in 2004 regardless of his lack of qualifications for leadership this is not because of the masa. Don’t ever forget that before he could be elected by the masa he had to be first a candidate and to be a candidate means being put up by powerful people interested in a presidency they can trade with. If we get a second Erap, it will be only partly because of the masa and only because they are being cynically deceived.

* * *

Speaking of the trial of Erap, Belle Abaya, former spokesperson of FVR, had this to say about the debate on whether or not the proceedings should be televised . . . "Erap’s perjury and plunder trials are a golden opportunity for Filipinos to reach the stage of shared memory of history that is so significant for reconciliation. Televising the trial will play a crucial role in making this happen. This is why the South African Truth and Reconciliation Commission chose to televise their hearings. So did the Royal Commission of Canada on the Aborigines, the trials of O.J. Simpson, Louise Woodward, Nigeria’s Human Rights Violations Investigation Committee, which was set up by President Obusegen Obansanjo, as catharsis to end one of Africa’s most brutal dictatorships.

Among other things I agree with her when she says that a televised trial will prevent the miscarriage of justice since the public will be able to morally sanction erring judges, prosecutors and counsels; expose the weaknesses of the system (such as that learned during the OJ Simpson trial); educate the country, particularly the youth, on the workings of our democracy; improve the people’s faith in the justice system; and allow Filipinos to form a consensus on the truth.

* * *

Forming a consensus could be the key to national reconciliation, she adds: Fifteen years after the fall of Marcos, our country is still in quandary over his unexplained wealth and abuses, evidenced by the dramatic rise in his trust ratings. We are faced with the dilemma of what to believe among the many truths presented (or distorted) by opposing PR agents and spin masters.

In order to restore the balance among our people, we must succeed in bridging the gaps in our conflicting perception of facts, statements and actions. By sitting together as a nation aiming to know the truth, we are starting a meaningful process of reconciliation. It is an act of faith in a system that will allow us to take cautious steps towards mutual recognition, respect, and responsibility. We must all walk this path together in the best venue possible.

Short of our being in court ourselves, television is, for now, the best way to make us partake in our modern history’s unprecedented unraveling. If we must heal, we must harmonize our past’s conflicting accounts, which have caused mutual hurts. If we must rebuild, we must heal the emotional and spiritual effects that brought a climate of distrust, anger and exclusion.

* * *

My e-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]