‘Respect’ vs truth

Malacañang has reportedly "demanded" the release from Senate custody of National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales. The Senate has, in turn, replied that, in essence, the Palace can go take a hike.

While politely acknowledging that, as a member of the Cabinet, Gonzales is entitled to respect, the Senate claims his detention is not out of disrespect for the executive branch of government, but because of Gonzales’ own disrespect for the legislative branch by refusing to answer reasonable questions.

One could argue that enough mutual disdain has been shown by the parties. That "abusive language" was "heaped" on Gonzales in the Senate," as the Press Secretary lamented, is beyond cavil. After all, Gonzales had to endure being called a pimp, a liar, unfit for his position, incompetent, a usurper of Presidential prerogatives, an amateur lawyer – all these epithets spat out with the utter contempt and sarcasm that only legislators practiced in the art of the withering cross-examination can unleash.

My God, anyone in the position of the uncharacteristically meek National Security Adviser would have been reduced to eating a banana, in full view of nationwide television, with blood pressure rising dangerously and sugar level dropping precipitously.

Still, the most the unimpressed Senators would concede was that, upon Gonzales’ release from the Heart Center, he would be given better quarters befitting his rank as Cabinet member. However, these quarters would be at the Senate, where he would remain under custody for so long as he refused to divulge the desired information.

The other Cabinet members, probably worried that similarly harsh treatment may await them in future Senate hearings to which they may be called, have been chanting the collective mantra of separation of powers and inter-departmental courtesy.

Muttering was also heard in the halls of the Palace snake-pit that the real reason the Senators are zeroing in on the Venable LLP contract, particularly that part about US funding for cha-cha, is that one of the principal objectives of Constitutional change is the abolition of the Senate. Supporters of Gonzales have gathered in front of the Heart Center and are flashing placards with the words "Bastos Ang Mga Senador. Buwagin ang Senado" (Shameless Senators. Abolish the Senate) boldly written on them.

In this incendiary atmosphere, we can forget about civility. Although Senate blue ribbon committee chair Joker Arroyo has been sounding a little conciliatory, saying he didn’t want a confrontation with Malacañang, he hasn’t signaled any let-up on the effort to get Gonzales to spill the beans.

While Arroyo concedes that the country can’t do without a national security adviser, he adds that Gonzales can just as well perform his assigned tasks from his hospital bed, which is a stone’s throw from his office, or from his quarters at the Senate… while, of course, under Senate custody for as long as his "contempt" of the Senate persists. This could take some time, since Gonzales’ physical debilitation may not be a real clue of his trademark bull-headedness, a useful trait in past battles with an entrenched dictator.

Arroyo and other Senators won’t budge on the request for an executive session, and in this they seem to be correct, unless Gonzales can give some indication of why public discussion of the Venable contract compromises national security, or why that contract is entitled to "confidentiality."

Some Cabinet members claim "executive privilege," arguing that discussions of Cabinet members with the Chief Executive must enjoy confidentiality in order to facilitate the formulation of national policy. But in the context of the Venable LLP contract, particularly the "scope of work" of the law firm, the claim seems outlandish. One might even call it, in the immortal words of Gen. Stormin’ Norman Schwarzkopf of Gulf War One fame, a lot of "bovine scatology" or, put indelicately, cow dung.

On the other hand, the "separation of powers" argument can cut both ways. While the executive department can "do its own thing," so can the legislature. Under the Constitution, Congress may conduct inquiries in aid of legislation "in accordance with its own duly published rules of procedure" provided that "the rights of persons appearing in or affected by such inquiries shall be respected" (Art. VI, Sec. 21). The members of the Senate blue ribbon committee insist that their treatment of Gonzales was fully in accord with the rules and was necessitated solely by his contemptuous conduct.

Besides, as everyone’s favorite authority on the Constitution, Father Joaquin Bernas, S.J. has written, separation of powers also allows for "checks and balances." The purpose, he says, is to prevent concentration of powers in one department and thereby avoid tyranny. He quotes US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis who said: "(T)he doctrine of separation of powers was adopted…to preclude the exercise of arbitrary power. The purpose was not to avoid friction, but, by means of the inevitable friction incident to the distribution of governmental powers, among the three departments, to save the people from autocracy."

Like most people, I too found the grilling of a visibly floundering Gonzales painful to watch. But I do not think the Senators crossed the line between legitimate questioning and gratuitous abuse. Moreover, I disagree that the Senators’ remarks were "unparliamentary." Rather, they were a vigorous, if vain, effort to get at the facts.

The National Security Adviser never established the "national security" or "public interest" basis for his request for an executive session. He could have done so, well in advance of the hearing, personally or with the assistance of his lawyers. His imprudence in waiting for the questioning to begin made it look like his request for confidentiality was an after-thought, an attempt to evade answering fundamental and eminently reasonable questions.

If Secretary Gonzales has chosen the role of fall guy, if he is taking the rap for someone or is covering up the roles of others, then I’m certain he knows he has to bear the consequences. Everyone else has left his side. His fellow Cabinet members have already performed their by-now accustomed role of playing deaf and dumb. I hope, Secretary Bert, this is all worth the sacrifice.