Peas in a pod

It may seem far-fetched, but worth considering – an EDSA people power revolt is not very different from a people’s initiative. The two are more similar than we want to think. Indeed a people’s initiative was put in the 1987 Constitution precisely so EDSA 1 could be institutionalized. There were concerns then that continuous reliance on massing people in the streets each time there was dissatisfaction with government was not only debilitating, it could be dangerous. We were lucky the first time it was peaceful but even then it teetered on the brink of violence. EDSA 2 showed signs of how ugly it could turn out when ordinary poor folk, neighborhood bullies and gangsters were lumped together as a people’s protest against Malacanang and the rich injecting Marxist overtones. But more ludicrous, the paid crowds were hauled in by two religious cults which claimed political clout. Partisans whether for EDSA or a people’s initiative may be getting it all wrong fighting each other. Indeed, the case could be made that the two are really peas in a pod, as it was intended by the 1987 Constitution.

The trouble begins when interested parties use either method for their personal agenda. In EDSA, people power ousted Marcos but installed a new set of officials too incompetent for bold leadership. By putting their names down in a people’s initiative to change the Constitution, Filipinos are protesting the status quo and challenging the system of government. Both are tinged with extralegal methods in the sense that they seek to depart from the established political order. Both use the strength of numbers to attain their objectives. It is my opinion that by focusing on what makes them alike, rather than what makes them differ, we open a whole new perspective for the Filipino nation. Who knows we will probably have a starting point for unity.

Both events happened because ordinary citizens in the Philippines do not have the power necessary to participate in nation building. Whether middle class or poor, they do not really have decision-making powers except to vote in flawed elections every so often. That passes for democracy. Like it or not, the Philippines is a plutocracy and we are only beginning to see why leadership cannot be left to these few. Those who mass up in crowds or sign up in droves to flex their muscle does not mean they have the power. It is the other way around. They do so because they want to be empowered. These is better described as tentative steps towards democracy.

Powerlessness of the people in the Philippine political setup is a fact making them easy prey in the battles between rival elites. In 1986 Filipinos massed in EDSA, jubilant that people power worked. But no sooner than the morning after and they found it was an empty victory. We removed Marcos but retained the unjust political and economic structures that made possible an unprecedented plunder of the country.

Both share obstacles embedded in the system to make the necessary reforms for a level playing field. Both are attempts to assert public good against predatory individuals. Today, signing for a people’s initiative has taken the place of massing in EDSA. Naturally, such an initiative has to have a mechanism to accomplish as did also the EDSA people power revolt. No matter. If local authority has mediated, it did so for a very worthwhile effort – to give a voice to the people.

* * *

Filipinos abroad who want to sign people’s initiative. "Corabel Y. Diel" <teacherbel@yahoo.com>of Filipinos for a Better Philippines wants to know how to sign for a people’s initiative. "I read about one of your friends in the Philippines asking where he/she can sign his/her agreement for Charter change. I would like to add my signature too. But I am in New York. Do you know of anyone or can you ask anyone you know here in NY to organize one so I can put in my signature? I think this is a better version than doing an EDSA Revolution III, this time in favor for a Charter change.

This column contacted ‘Sigaw ng Bayan" for your query and was told that you can contact their websites: www.sigawngbayan.com or www.philippinegazette.com for updates on all info and activities on People’s Initiative. As far as the COMELEC is concerned, it is not the source of the initiative so at least for the moment it is confined to verifying whether a signatory is a voter and to what district he or she belongs. In the case of Filipinos abroad, they can sign up through Sigaw ng Bayan and their signatures can then be verified against the voters’ record in embassies. This is something the COMELEC can do through its voters verification record in embassies. I guess OFW signatures will be counted in the total number garnered for the initiative.

* * *

Reply to Senate President Franklin Drilon. Jose R. Garcia, publicist of the Senate I presume was writing at the behest of Sen. Franklin Drilon and his cohorts. He should be more careful when fingerpointing who backed Marcos and his plunder of the nation. After all, Drilon was lawyering for the dictator even when he knew what the coco levy was about. Worse, he suffered no retribution and that is not something to be proud about. By then the Senate president had quickly switched loyalties, in the nick of time. Not so with the governors and other local authorities who supported Marcos that the writer claims were ousted. Shame. Please naman, sir ingat kayo. Drilon knows exactly where each of us were during that ignominious time. It is unfortunate if public opinion is against changing a system of government if the likes of Drilon’s credentials continues to flourish politically, then those of us who know better should work doubly hard and make sure Filipinos understand how wrong it is.

The Senate President, I am afraid, is not my idea of a good public official. He has done nothing to merit being ‘popular.’ We have a job in our hands to overcome any survey based on a lack of awareness by the public on the Constitution, as our guide for making decisions. On tirades against me about comments on EDSA, I played active roles in 1986 and 2001. I am not prepared to be lectured on it by the likes of Drilon and Co. It is clearly ignorance not to understand why "the relationship between local authority and its constituents is a more enduring relationship than the crowds at one-off EDSA events. It has nothing to do with governors, mayors, councilors and barangay officials who backed the Marcos dictatorship. It is sad that a ‘genuine’ protest in the end failed us all. As for the self-serving statement that the "Senate today stands as an institutional bulwark against dictatorship and deception". Sus. Mr. Drilon must be wearing blinders not to see he is surrounded by Marcos allies. I agree we should not fake history. I do not know whether to cry or to laugh at the threat that I will suffer the same fate as Marcos. As for his lawyering for Marcos, I concede Drilon has been darned lucky. He’s usually on the right side to further his political fortunes, but this time, he may not be so lucky.

* * *

My e-mail is cpedrosaster@gmail.com