Those boycotting Congressmen

The congressmen who boycotted President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo's state of the nation address last Monday displayed a type of behavior which was not only childish, it was despicable. They were supposed to be honorable men, but what they did made them less deserving of such name. By not lending an ear to what the President of the Republic had to say on the state of the nation, they forfeited their role as legislators and actually went down to the level of the hypocrites and bigots. Honorable congressmen? What a joke! And what a slap on the face of those who elected them!

Perhaps, they forgot that ours is a democratic government. One's perception may be another man's provocation. One's opinion may contradict another man's option. But that is how it works - diversity within the ambit of unity. And always, the majority gets the cake. And always, respect for the integrity of one's personhood. "I may disagree with what you said, but I will defend to death your right to say it", says a social philosopher. The person is the thing. What is said is not as important as who said it. But when it is the President who speaks in the context of an address to the country, both the speaker and the statement are of paramount importance. The speaker, because she is the President; the statement, because it is an official utterance of the presidency.

In the podium before the legislators in a formal session, GMA was not just GMA. She was the presidency, representing an integral institution of the Philippine government co-equal with the legislative itself and of the judiciary. On that occasion one cannot show disrespect to the President without disrespecting the presidency itself. Perhaps, in other occasions, such as a birthday bash, one may be less genteel to the President, but not in the halls of Congress during an official affair.

To denigrate the presidency is to downgrade the oath one has taken as a public official. "I so solemnly swear…" It is an oath to stand for the Constitution and to obey the laws of the land. Had the boycotting congressmen forgotten their oath of office? Had their positions influenced their ego to the point of callousness? The less they could have done was stay in their seats, as Senator Drilon did, and play the monkey trick of hearing nothing, seeing nothing. They might not have joined the standing ovation, of course, nor clapped their hands. By staying in the session hall they could have shown the world the kind of stuff Filipino legislators are made of - perceptive, urbane, broadminded.

What these boycotting congressmen did was worse than a mass action. A mass action is at least sanctioned by the law as a means of seeking redress of governances. Conducted within the confines of the law, this activity produces hardly any ill effects upon any social institutions save perhaps a bruised ego on those concerned. But a boycott in Congress simply meant that some public officials had abandoned their jobs. They are paid to enact laws, and to guide them in this a SONA is needed to appraise them of legislative priorities as well as the thrusts of the current leadership. Without such guide there would be a gap between program and laws. It would be to each his own as far as both branches are concerned and there would be a stalemate of governance. That's why congressmen should listen to SONAs whether they like it or not.

We understand. These cohorts of oppositionists do not like GMA. They would have nothing to do with her, that's why they filed an impeachment charge hours before the SONA. But what we cannot understand is that since most of these congressmen are lawyers, in fact, some are kingpins in the legal profession, why had they prejudged the case? Lawyers are supposed to be open minded. Evidence is the meat of their conviction. Carefully analyzed, sifted, verified and judiciously weighed, evidence brings to light the guilt or innocence of the accused. Had these congressmen forgotten the culture of their profession and had prejudged the outcome of the case? With minds like these what can we expect from this cabal of lawmakers but obstructionism and filibustering?

As they perhaps hobnobbed together in some secluded nooks in the Batasan building, they must have longingly gazed towards the banner-touting militants with their anti-Gloria barrage. They must have silently wished for a violent confrontation to justify their childish deed. If they did this, we would not have been surprised. Surely, boycotting a congressional proceeding is similar to the mindless antics of street parliamentarians.