So what?

So what if El Shaddai does not support Cha-cha? Good. The Filipino people will finally see who its enemies are. It is understandable if the likes of a religious hack like Mike Velarde who has made a fortune peddling his ‘influence’ over ignorant followers should be against it. Like the spoiled brat senators, he would lose his advantages in a presidential system. Every election time, he peddles his so-called solid El Shaddai vote for any candidate willing to pay the price in money or favors. He is the Catholic version of Eraño Manalo’s INK and together they dictate the politics of this country. Both are into practicing a very profitable ‘religious’ industry.

He would find it more difficult to sell his ‘wares’ in a parliamentary system which has no need for his alleged solid Shaddai vote. I have just come from a meeting in which it was said that he is only for ‘informing’ the people before they sign. Oh? To go by his principle does he inform his followers on why they should vote solidly for a particular candidate just because he says so? The hypocrisy is sickening. But if he has flourished in his line of work, it is because no one, neither the politicians nor the Catholic Church who should know better turn a blind eye, as if nothing is wrong with what he does. You would think that the CBCP in its quest of morals should be the first to question how this man should have so much political power by peddling ‘religion’. But not only is the CBCP silent, they encourage the hypocrisy by cooperating with him.

As far as I can see on television the disgraced Bishop Teodoro Bacani sits in the CBCP directorate as well as being an adviser for Velarde’s El Shaddai. So instead of being rattled by Velarde’s statement, constitutional reform advocates should be relieved. Thank God, he is not on our side. I don’t know about others, but I find it hard to reconcile moral reform with a religious hack like him. And that is not even if Cory Aquino, the entire CBCP, the Makati Business Club and surprise, surprise, the senators were behind him. It is time to call a spade a spade and we should not hesitate to speak forthrightly and publicly when we know that something is wrong just because we have become accustomed to these anomalies in our midst. He is hardly the person to call our attention to ‘inform’ the people. I would like to inform him of that and whoever is concerned about our ‘morals.’ So what if he is not for charter change!

* * *

In Davao, I had the pleasure to be reacquainted with Archbishop Fernando Capalla, former head of the Catholic Bishops Conference. My husband and I met him in Tripoli during an interfaith conference organized by WICS, the World Islamic Society. I was surprised to see him there, thinking that no Catholic bishop would want to be seen in a multifaith assembly organized by Muslims. But Bishop Capalla is a different man, he can think and likes to engage in debate. He cuts a respectable figure among Catholics because of his willingness to understand people of other faiths.

Indeed, I was pleasantly surprised when he said categorically, "I am for Charter change because I am for federalism". And then he went on to say how much he understands the suffering in the Muslim community, their wanting to practice their own religion and their own culture and why we must help them achieve this through some form of federal government. But to return to Bishop Capalla’s support for Charter change if it will mean adopting federalism. I understand he is a a founding member of the federalist movement in Mindanao. He has seen it and understands the difficulties on the ground of a multi-cultural society. He and his companions in the federalism movement in Mindanao wanted a more active role in the peace agreement but civil society was excluded in the final stages. For these groups, some kind of a ‘critical partnership’ for peace and development is possible, especially if it helps marginalized people. He works closely with some members of the Advocacy Commission for Charter Change among them our chairman, Lito Lorenzana and Rey Magno Teves, a Con-com member and national convenor of Lihuk Pideral Mindanaw and Movement for a Federal Republic Philippines. So it is not quite true to say that bishops are against Charter change. Bishop Capalla is a good argument for that. The way I see it, he is capable of thinking for himself and if it is for the good of his fellow Mindanaons, then it has his support.

* * *

Some members of the opposition had better re-read their lawbooks and the Constitution if they think that the local courts can rule over the actions of the Comelec. As Comelec officials have rightly said, it is a constitutional body that cannot be stopped from doing its job. It is not agreeing with the proposal of a people’s initiative for Charter change. Not at all. What it is doing is verifying signatures which are claimed to be in favor of a proposal for Charter change. In other words, it is acting in compliance with its constitutional duty to verify the signatures of registered voters.

What those who do not want Comelec to verify the signatures are saying is that it should not do its duty. It should abscond and just listen to what they want. Who is dictating to whom? Let’s just go by the rule of law. Let the Comelec verify the signatures and once it has done its duty, only then can the petitioners file their petition. It will then be accepted or rejected by the electorate through a plebiscite which is the proper way to do things.

But as the Opposition would have it, they will stop the people’s initiative come hell or high water by going through the local courts. I can see that some judges see the anomaly of a local court stopping a constitutional body from performing its duties. An Iloilo trial court judge who obviously knows his law has dismissed a petition there while a Roxas City judge has issued a temporary restraining order against the signature verification. A presidential hopeful, Senator Mar Roxas of the Roxas dynasty comes from Roxas. You may not agree with everything Comelec Chairman Benjamin Abalos does but in this case, he is right when he says that a regional trial court does not have jurisdiction over a constitutional body.

* * *

Interestingly, those against Charter change are coming out of the woodwork. They have one thing in common – they do not want change. The defenders of the status quo, the upper class, will not give in so easily their privileges under the system. Meanwhile, the information campaign of the ADCOM has gone on full gear, traipsing all over the country, distributing primers and engaging in open discussions. The debate is in full throttle and we are all the better for it.

* * *

My e-mail is cpedrosaster@gmail.com