Upset in Manila

The Concom members were warned. Manila was a difficult place. This is where presidents or would be presidents are made and unmade. The tendency of the Manila mind is to oppose a contested issue for whatever reason. Unfortunately it is not possible to avoid coming here – this is the capital of the country. Arguably, it is said where Manila goes, so also goes the Philippines. With all these fearsome preconceptions, we went to Manila last Wednesday carefully treading our way as if to enter the lions’ den.

Mayor Lito Atienza was not boasting when he said he understood the mind of his constituents. He would not be just a host. When his turn came to speak he gave a stirring speech on how gifted Filipinos were and how rich the country was in natural resources but today the country remains at the bottom of the league in Asia. Isn’t it strange that through all these years, the Philippines instead of leaping to prosperity remains a kulelat? We need change, he said to more than five hundred barangay leaders, NGOs, religious, businessmen that crowded the Bulwagang Villegas. They cheered him with lusty mabuhays.

Atienza refrained from saying anything about his own personal preferences. No mention was made in his entire speech on whether he was for parliamentary or federal or the liberalization or economic reforms although it is bruited about by some of his friends, (among them members of the Concom) that he was for retaining the presidential unitary system with some modifications. Commissioner Jose Villanueva who has close links with the mayor, on one hand, did not hesitate to give his own view and preference – presidential unitary. However, ever the gentleman, he was quick to add that there may be differences in the commission but these varied views sprang from the same sense of patriotism.

It was touch and go on how the consultations would go when the audience divided into workshops into the areas of concerns – form of government, structure of the republic and economic reforms. The surprise was the level of political awareness of the audience. They asked difficult questions – what will replace the check and balance by the separation of powers, what about terms of office, how can we shift to parliamentary without strong political parties? The discussions were lively and animated. At one point, I had to ask them why they were so informed about the differences between the parliamentary and presidential. A barangay captain said they often discussed these in their meetings. At the end of the discussions, as we had done in the past to get a ‘sense’ of the thinking of group we conducted a vote. A shift to parliamentary government got 39 votes while the proposal to retain the present presidential system received five votes. For the structure of the republic, the shift to federal from unitary 27 participants voted in favor with only one abstention.

In the workshop on liberalization and economic reforms an overwhelming majority were in favor of liberalization of land ownership, the utilization of natural resources, the operation of public utilities and some industries ie telecommunications, mass media, advertising and educational institutions. Paradoxically, they also wanted to retain the Filipino first policy in the Constitution but also wanted the term national patrimony be clearly defined.

At the plenary, the Manilans reconfirmed their positions in the different workshops never once hesitating to speak their mind. A UP professor suggested that the consultations be widened and brought to those who will not have the chance to be at these consultations, among them the politically under represented, socially marginalized and culturally discriminated sectors. All in all, it was an upset, something totally unpredictable but there you are – Filipinos are capable of speaking their own mind when they are given a chance to.

LETTER: Carl Cid S.M. Inting – Cebu City, <[email protected] wrote this letter after reading my column on ‘Awards and Circumstance.’

"I couldn’t agree more with you regarding the disappointment Cory Aquino turned out to be. It makes me wonder about this award being given to her now, and the full-page ads in leading newspapers trumpeting this achievement. Is Cory being defensive about her legacy?

Cory’s role in ousting the dictator will forever earn her a place in history, although, in hindsight, it would have been better if she had stopped at that. Unfortunately, Cory allowed herself to be used by her family and by her advisers. Consequently, she overreached. Cory could never attain the selflessness and stature of her contemporary, Nelson Mandela.

I can forgive Cory for not having the foresight and the intellectual capacity to seek renegotiation of the obviously tainted Marcos behest loans as soon as she assumed office. I can forgive her for neglecting the power industry and giving rise to the 12-hour power black-outs that characterized her term. I can even forgive her for tolerating the graft and corruption of her relatives, and her traditional politician friends, who hungrily took power after EDSA and went into business as usual.

But I cannot forgive her for jealously guarding the present Constitution, as if it was her most lasting legacy to the Filipino people. I cannot forgive her for her selfishness and short-sightedness in being so protective of such a defective and contentious Charter.

Cory must be humble enough to admit that this Constitution is the primary cause of all our troubles and lack of economic advancement. It has enshrined unbridled, personality-oriented politics, to the detriment of progress and prosperity. It caused us all the troubles that were brought about by electing someone like Joseph Estrada. And the troubles that have risen because an opposition obsessed with power at all cost put up a mindless candidate like Fernando Poe Jr. who, despite his unquestioned popularity, clearly did not possess the capacity to run the affairs of state. Does Cory wish to condemn this country to repeat this vicious cycle forever?

A high-ranking justice in Cory’s administration once remarked that he was appalled at how petty and short-sighted Cory could be. The justice was referring to how Cory pursued the prosecution of Louie Beltran for his "under the mattress" statements with much more zeal than the investigation of her husband, Ninoy’s, murder. Louie Beltran was sentenced. But, to this day, no one knows who murdered Ninoy Aquino.

I hope Cory Aquino becomes less defensive. She is a prayerful woman and I hope she will be enlightened. Changing or amending the 1987 Constitution will not diminish her legacy. Nor should it be considered a personal affront. If she could be more humble and flexible, she will realize that she could give the country a more lasting legacy by admitting that the Constitution adapted during her term is full of imperfections. Cory needs to rise to the occasion and show the country, and the world, that she has the foresight, the flexibility and the leadership to advocate a change in course when we are clearly headed the wrong way.

* * *

My e-mail is [email protected]