The first came when the persons manning the computers in the 1986 snap presidential elections walked out. Ferdinand E. Marcos and Corazon C. Aquino were then contesting the presidency.
As it was later revealed, those computer people said they could not anymore stomach the kind of cheating they were forced either to accomplish or to bear. But, believe me, while their act was dramatic, it was fraught with the gravest of all dangers. It could very well have been dismissed by the so-called silent majority and perhaps, not many would care if they were severely sanctioned by the strong arms of a martial ruler. Very few people thought it could lead to a groundswell against the regime. In the end however, the event which came to be known as EDSA I "people power" was, in my mind, a serious repercussion more than just an aftershock of the said walk out.
The second event came at the halls of the Senate. Then Sen. Teofisto Guingona did what was unthinkable to many. Some observers believed it was a political hara-kiri on the part of Guingona to deliver his "I accuse" privilege speech against an extremely popular then sitting president of the Philippines. As it turned out, the indefatigable senator, even if mindful of the risk he was facing, started an uproar which led to the abortive impeachment of former Pres. Joseph Estrada and the latter's eventual downfall.
Standing on their own, those incidents would not have led to their perceived eventual consequences. They were far too insignificant. In the case of the information technology men behind the computers, they consisted of men and women who did not occupy lofty government positions. But, it did not matter that they were small fries. Their collective act demanded that the greater mass of the citizenry took cognizance of the ongoing fraud against which the computer wizards courageously fought.
On Sen. Guingona's privilege speech, it was one of the many our eloquent senators could, in the discharge of their sworn duties, do. While it was particularly earth shaking on account of the gravity of the charges poised on the highest official of the land, the silent majority only expected a routine and interminable senate investigation to follow.
I recall these events however, in the light of the impending suspension of Taguig-Pateros Rep. Peter Allan Cayetano. On the complaint filed by First Gentleman Miguel Arroyo for unethical conduct, the beleaguered congressman faces the fate of being sanctioned by the Lower House.
To recall, the complaint of the first gentleman stemmed from the expose of the young legislator that the first family had enormous accounts in a German bank. He was of course, alluding that such a huge account could only have been realized from less moral, if not less legitimate, sources.
If we gleaned from the lessons of the Guingona "I accuse" caper, the normal course of the legislative chamber would have been to conduct an investigation into the Cayetano expose. But, it did not happen here. Cayetano did not have the chance to prove his accusation because the powers-that-be quickly turned the tables on him. Instead of waiting for the evidence which the legislator could have in his possession, Congress entertained the complaint of the FG Arroyo and chose to proceed to investigate it rather than the expose. What, to me, sounded odorous during the inquiry was the glaring attempt of the committee. It looked to me that, if the Cayetano bellyaching were to be believed, the committee investigating the FG Arroyo complaint suppressed the presentation of Cayetano's evidence.
While the exposes of Guingona and Cayetano were both directed against alleged graft and corruption, the results seem to achieve contradicting ends. Today, our lower house, may finally decide on the recommendation of the committee. If there should be a walk out of those who believe that they are to bear an iniquitous inquiry, it might trigger an incident not quite unlike to that which took place subsequent to the walk-out of the IT personnel in the 1986 snap elections. I shudder at the thought of its taking place.