Ransom or no ransom

The recent hostage-taking of TV anchor Ces Oreña-Drilon and her camera crew, once again brought to light the Shakespearian dilemma of to be or not to be, more apt to the situation, to pay or not to pay ransom.

Pragmatically, the reality isn't a guessing game of paying or not, but on how much the victim's family can haggle on the final amount of ransom. And obviously, the victim is at the mercy of the culprits who are expected to squeeze dry possible resources.

There's that policy of any government that no ransom shall be paid; otherwise, they say, there's no end to kidnap-for-ransom offenses. However, such toothless policy is more honored in the breach than its observance. Victims' families are bound to negotiate with the kidnappers, lest their loved ones in captivity be "salvaged."

Since Day One of the waylaying of Drilon and company, the government through PNP spokesmen and ABS-CBN were emphatic on no ransom. Media outlets were bombarded with the "no ransom" repeatedly made without batting an eyelash as ABS-CBN and the authorities made seamless statements frowning on money for the victims' release.

The public perception is not taken in by such antics of bombastic lies of "no ransom." Instead of just keeping mum, or making nondescript and non-committal remarks — short of evasive either-way stand — the authorities should not underestimate the intelligence of the public by making it believe that, indeed, no ransom is being considered in such situations.

At least by such stance, the authorities shall be relieved of making big liars or laughing stock fools of themselves. Or, differentiate them from the "kukok" or black crow that, when shooed or driven away from feeding on the farmers' crops, would take flight protesting "wa, wa, wa" - as in no, no, no - while holding in its talons an ear of corn.

The ransom factor in the Drilon kidnap surfaced when Indanan Mayor Alvarez Isnaji and Sulu Vice Governor Lady Ann Sahidulla had appeared on TV as possible "negotiators". And, since Isnaji was the kidnappers' choice as the "negotiator", the lady vice-governor gave way.

What is perplexing though is that in one photo surreptitiously taken obviously by DILG's undercover emissary, Vice Gov. Sahidulla is also caught touching a bundle of money, in reference to what later was the initial P5M ransom. Also present were Mayor Isnaji and his son and DILG agent Guidato who must have brought the money.

Did the P5M ante coincide with hostage Angelo Valderama's release, or sort of rain check for the bigger sum of P15M or P30M to cover the release of Drilon, Jimmy Encarnacion, and Octavio Dinampo? Anyway, whether Mayor Isnaji and son, and whoever had roles in that kidnap-for-ransom amateurish job, so Secretary Ronaldo Puno alleges, had been in cahoots with the ASG kidnappers has yet to be determined by the Court.

 What appears a funny sidelight was the role of Senator Loren Legarda who managed to take a "front seat" after the released hostages were interviewed in the field by the media. Another "front view" of Senator Loren covered by TV was when she got off from the plane ahead of the freed victims. One source said that the scene had been pre-arranged purposely for Loren to disembark first for that special photo-op.

Funnier still was Loren's later interview statement among which was her repeated assertion that she had told the kidnappers that no ransom had to be paid for the victims' "unconditional release", her own words. As it turned out, while Loren had been contacted by Drilon via cellphone, Loren was not privy to the ransom maneuverings that led to actual ransom payment and the eventual release. Meantime, the TV cameo role of Senator Loren faded out with nary an epilogue.

* * *

Email: [email protected]