A small band of self-appointed guardians of "truth", running out of gimmicks in their cupboard to sustain media interest, have decided to undertake a mockery of our judicial processes by convening what they call a "People’s Court." As part of that ridiculous effort, the small band made their way to the Palace gates to serve the President a "subpoena".
One minor Palace functionary bothered to meet the self-appointed agents of the "People’s Court" and receive their "subpoena." Then he did the only correct thing he could have done given the circumstances: in full public view, he tore up the document handed him by the faded protestors.
It was trash. That fact needed underscoring.
Those obsessed with smearing the Presidency are now subverting the majesty of our judicial processes. They do not mind undermining all our institutions in pursuit of their partisan obsessions.
They do not mind making fools of themselves, either – having, it seems, no other productive thing to do but precisely that.
Most normal people go to the streets to peddle usable things. A frenzied, vociferous political minority, however, has been in the streets the past few weeks peddling nothing but their utter uselessness. They harangue the rest of us trying to make our own days productive. They buttonhole us with their incessant self-righteousness and deluge us with their arrogance.
They might as well grow their hair, wear grubby robes and start proclaiming that the heavens are about to fall. They might as well tar their faces and perform voodoo rituals, exorcising all of us for our apathy in the face of their unfathomable outrage.
If they do that, they might win the same amount of media attention they crave for without damaging our people’s appreciation for due process.
Why do magistrates wear dark, flowing robes when they perform their duties? It is to emphasize the majesty of the law, the impartiality of the process and the respect for the right of every person accused to properly refute his accusers.
Proponents of this cheap gimmick called the "People’s Court" bristle at the suggestion that they are about to convene a kangaroo court – a court of the same variety as that which condemned feminists as witches and ordered them burned at the stake. Or, to employ a more recent example, a court of the same variety as those convened by the CPP-NPA that ordered thousands of loyal comrades to death by the most horrible means.
But what else could this be but a kangaroo court?
Who will preside over it?
Teofisto Guingona who had to be hosed down two weeks ago because he was raving in the streets? Romeo Capulong, lawyer of the National Democratic Front who helped ensure the safety in exile of his comrades accused of perpetrating the Filipino version of the Killing Fields? The ringleaders of the so-called Hyatt 10 who, only a few days ago, found the gall to impose a November 15 deadline on the elected Vice-President to take over from the elected President?
And who will present the evidence against the accused?
Jejomar Binay, who has himself to deal with corruption charges filed against him at the Ombudsman? Linggoy Alcuaz and Rex Cortez, furious fans of the late Fernando Poe, Jr.? The cheerleaders of the mob that some now call "Edsa Tres"?
Who will balance the evidence and rebut the charges?
The congressmen of Bayan Muna who, last week, sent in their storm troopers to charge at police lines and maul policewomen? Fr. Robert Reyes, who, lately, has been in the business of improperly performing exorcism rites on public buildings? Or, perhaps, Ka Roger, who has been in the business of burning buses, bombing cell sites and massacring unarmed soldiers on mercy missions?
Heaven help us. Calling this a kangaroo court is a facile attempt to be polite. This is an asylum. Or a zoo.
In which case, the only purpose served by this "People’s Court" is pure entertainment. If they must do a good job at it, I suggest they deploy the Sex Bomb dancers to perform after each long-winded speech – as they did during the Ayala Avenue rallies.
If this is a production number with some pretension to magnificence, there must be a good costume director for it. I suggest that instead of garbing the impostor magistrates in boring black robes, they borrow some of German Moreno’s suits – the better to dazzle us.
Fortunately, there is no law banning the convening of "People’s Courts." Those behind this gimmick can always claim an extension of the freedom of expression. In a democracy, everyone has the right to be ridiculous.
Even the acerbic Justice Secretary will have to bow to that. He ought to stop threatening those behind this gimmick with charges of usurping public authority. He should dig deeper into what is left of his sense of humor, sit back and be entertained.
In a democracy, we all have the right to be entertained. That right extends to farcical acts.
I hope they televise this too. It should bring as much fun as watching those Senate hearings where the good senators of the land, anxious to look serious on television and launch tirades against the administration, wrestle constantly with their own inability to articulate anything clearly and with conviction.
A "people’s court" will do all of us a favor. It will bring an alternative to the repetitive scenes of street confrontation and unwanted public bathing.
The more seriously they try to mimic judicial demeanor, the more hilarious these guys will be.