Not just a rebuff either – for the first time in history, since it became an independent constitutional body in 1940, the Comelec got its comeuppance from the High Tribunal for defying a Supreme Court ruling in the cases involving "party-list" members of the House of Representatives.
The Supreme Tribunal is not only completely reversing a poll body resolution proclaiming five additional party-list representatives to be added to the eight party-list congressmen already seated in the Lower House.
Chairman Abalos and his six Comelec Commissioners will be reprimanded and heavily-fined by the Tribunal.
Our increasingly insolent poll body officials deserve what they are getting from the Supreme Court. The severe reprimand and considerable fines levelled against the Comelec’s top officials are a clear sign that the High Tribunal will not shirk its duty of putting poll body officers in their proper place – in sharp contrast to the majority of the members of the House of Representatives (and other kowtowing politicians) who didn’t allow "impeachment" proceedings against a Comelec Commissioner to even get to first base.
As for the Comelec’s barefaced attempt to force through the designation of five more party-list choices to seats in the House of Representatives, it was a disgraceful exhibition of arrogance. Did Abalos, who has shown himself to be a TRAPO, and his confederates believe they could defy and overcome a Supreme Court decision? Now, to their sorrow, they know better.
For that matter, we need more members in our already extravagantly over-budgeted Congress like we need a hole in the head. The long-suffering taxpayers should thank the Supreme Court for preventing more would-be "congressmen" from jumping onto the Gravy Train.
The antics of the Comelec, sadly, put in grave doubt whether that quarrelsome and querulous poll body can even gear up, much less streamline its operations, to conduct credible national elections in 2004. National? With the "absentee voting" law just having been approved and signed, how will the Comelec handle the OFW (overseas Filipino workers) ballots?
The bedrock of any true democracy is the electoral process. It’s been demonstrated that no process exists. How then can we hold elections? Unless there’s drastic reform in attitudes, integrity, and fidelity, not just in the form of added and adequate financing and the automation and computerization of vote counting and tabulation, the people’s will can only be frustrated.
At this late stage, idiocracy – not democracy – better describes the state of the nation.
How public can you get? What’s Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo’s decision on complying with the Supreme Court’s order to "let those who appear responsible for this humongous mess be brought to account for their participation. Let justice be done!" (Wasn’t Disini then "responsible" for this mess – which for the past 18 years has cost the Filipino people hundreds of thousands of dollars yearly in interest payments to the Westinghouse corporation? And to think that the nuclear plant is crumbling away in Morong, never having been used!)
Disini managed to skip town before the People Power "uprising" in February 1986 toppled the Marcos regime. He’s been living in comfort in Austria since then – leading the life, as they say, of Riley. He reportedly acquired a chateau, a new wife, and the title of Count, along with his new life. What brought him back? Confidence that the arm of the law was too short and too weak to get him – after all these years?
The High Tribunal has ruled otherwise. The events of the past few days reinforce the conviction that the Supreme Court is determined not to be ignored – or denied.
But how’s this for super-arrogance? One of our senators has been threatening to summon the ranking officials of the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force (FATF) to appear before his Senate committee to explain why they had the nerve to "blacklist" the Philippines owing to the inadequacy of our AMLA, or Anti-Money Laundering Law. Sanamagan, don’t you think the swelled heads of some of our solons might be getting too big for even a jumbo hat bearing the tag: "Imperial Philippines" (No longer "Wow Philippines", but "HOW, Philippines".)
How, for example, will that senator drag those FATF officials from Paris to face grilling here? Will he send the sergeant-at-arms of the Senate, or a local sheriff, to deliver the subpoena to the French capital? (I suspect too many might volunteer for the task.)
Some of our Senators and Representatives seem to be considering a better idea. They’re thinking of their committees going to Paris (at great sacrifice, no doubt) to conduct the inquiry there, and get the testimony of the . . . er, accused. I can imagine the agenda already: The first hearing will be at the Crazy Horse saloon, the second at the Moulin Rouge in Montmartre, and the third at the Lido on the Champs-Elysées. If a fourth session is required, they can check out whether the Folies Bérgères still exists. Perhaps the latter cabaret show best expesses the nature of our Senate hearings. Then there’s the Opéra Garnier, on the Place de l’Opéra – which would be a fitting place to stage one of our typical political soap-operas!
In the case of l’Affaire Chirac, in which the French President castigated the "New Europe" countries from Central and Eastern Europe who had signed the Letter of Eight, as well as the "Vilnius Group" of 10 European Union and NATO-candidate countries who had also supported the position on Iraq of the US, it threw into disarray the conclusion of the EU summit, as well as the Atlantic Alliance.
Not only had Chirac threatened that the vote of only one current EU member (like France) could block the entire enlargement process of the European Union, and thus torpedo the hopes of the 10 aspiring countries to join the EU in May next year (not this year, as I erroneously said yesterday), he had singled out, probably as ingrates (since they get grant-support from France for the undertaking of nurturing the French language), Romania and Bulgaria.
Let me further correct myself. The 10 aspirant-members weren’t given a voice, even at the closing ceremonies of the EU summit in Brussels. At the last minute, the French and German governments had put pressure on Greece, which currently holds the six-month "Presidency" of the EU, to reverse the invitation to the candidate states to attend Monday night’s summit, even just as observers.
Some of the rebuffed Eastern Europeans grumbled that having gotten rid of the Soviet-time Moscow diktat, why were they now facing another form of diktat in the EU, imposed by the French – and backed up by Germany? Indeed, when Chirac in his outburst snapped that the offending countries had "missed an opportunity to shut up", the group bridled.
In the grim Realpolitik of today’s crisis and future crises, it seems, the Eastern countries of "New Europe" believe that the US , not the Germans or the French, might be their ultimate protector. What do you think?
When asked by reporters whether he was dismayed by the massive anti-war demonstrations in London and elsewhere in the world, and, worse, his own serious drop in approval ratings, Blair replied that he was not involved in a popularity contest, but felt he had to do what he thinks is right. Hopefully, someday, he added, his ratings might go up again. But he stuck to his guns. That’s what leadership entails – the courage to do what’s unpopular at the moment.
Whether Blair chose the right or the wrong course, time will tell.
A leader, who’s standing pat, too, despite a storm of public protest in Australia, is Prime Minister John Howard – fresh from trips to England and Indonesia.
Howard had said months earlier that he might retire when he reaches the age of 64 – which is this July. But the other day, rejecting outcries from objectors for the calling of a plebiscite on whether Australia should join an attack on Iraq (Canberra has already dispatched a 2,000-member contingent), Howard asserted that if the public doesn’t like the job he’s done, "they’ll throw me out" at the next election. I suppose this is to announce that he’s not quitting – he’s running.
Good on yer, Mate. I’ve disagreed with Howard once or twice in the past, but I salute him for having the balls – and the leadership. Not that it matters to him, Mate, of course.