Let us address our problems now

In a war that kills and impoverishes thousands, there should be no dilly-dallying. Yet that is what we are being told is the right thing to do and we sheepishly obey the keepers of the status quo because of alleged ‘public opinion’ machinated through media and surveys. Where is the democracy when advocates are terrorized from the path of peace, and this after so much painstaking effort?

Perhaps the most vicious demonstration of this elitist arrogance is the reaction to the recent MOA-AD. It was attacked and vilified by opposition and their cohorts in media, some of whom never even bothered to find out what it was all about. As if that were not bad enough, the critics then proceeded to make sure it was never attempted again by bringing in extraneous political factors. The endgame of the critics was to totally reject any peace settlement because it was only a way through which President GMA would use to extend her term.

A reader once wrote to this column in the internet that he was surprised at the manner in which the peace settlement was so viciously attacked and ridiculed. Given the importance of a peace settlement to our country, he thought it should have been the stuff of headlines and front pages everyday, as our newspapers are wont to highlight anti-government stories. Moreover, he adds, it should draw on the country’s finest minds so it can be achieved as soon as possible.

* * *

In this regard, we might learn from Ekhart Tolle’s book The Power of Now: A Guide to Spiritual Enlightenment which is sweeping the US for the simple lessons it gives to achieve individual enlightenment. He teaches that with individual enlightenment comes also the way to end conflicts among nations. The book tells us how to live in the Now, and see beyond our own minds. He writes that it is here, in the Now that the power and beauty of life can be lived. By the Now Tolle also means “Being,” or “Presence.”

Enlightenment, according to Tolle, is a “natural state of felt oneness with Being.” When you are present, when your attention is fully and intensely in the Now, Being can be felt, but it can never be understood mentally. To regain awareness of Being and to abide in that state of ‘feeling-realization’ is enlightenment.”

“Direct your attention inward,” he says, “If you get the inside right, the outside will fall into place. Think of what a Now-thinking people would do, confronted with a war like Mindanao.

* * *

So what should we do now? There are lessons to learn from the two attempts to change the Constitution through people’s initiative so scorned and ridiculed by those enamored by their own minds of what they see as the future if we were to change the Constitution to reform our politics.

The first point we must bring out is that a people’s initiative was an institution of democratic governance even in the earliest days in Athens. It is not an invention of Filipino politicians who want longer terms.

Apart from the assembly, officeholders, council or courts was the citizen-initiator. Wikipedia says he was the figure that drove the whole system, Called Ho boulomenos, it refers to he who wishes, or anyone who wishes.

It is about “the right of citizens to take the initiative: to stand and speak in the assembly, to initiate a public law suit (that is, one held to affect the political community as a whole), to propose a law before the lawmakers or to approach the council with suggestions.”

And here is probably an important lesson we can learn from those days. “Unlike officeholders, the citizen initiator was not vetted before taking up office or automatically reviewed after stepping down — it had after all no set tenure and might be an action lasting only a moment. But any stepping forward into the democratic limelight was risky and if someone chose (another citizen initiator) they could be called to account for their actions and punished.”

The citizen-initiator was so important that the ‘basis of his political activity was the invitation issued to everyone (every qualified free male Athenian citizen) by the phrase “whoever wishes”.”

* * *

The key to this Athenian institution was how to meld the citizen-initiator with lawmaking. Using this model, we could draw lessons from the two people’s initiatives that were attempted to revise the constitution. Too many people were carried away by form instead of the substance of a people’s initiative. Too many, and that included Supreme Court justices, who were more interested in the how signatures were gathered for a people’s initiative rather than in helping people assert an initiative to enable the entire citizenry to vote upon a petition.

Having said that I suggest we seek ways to devise a more transparent and satisfactory way to gather signatures with less partisanship.

A group of citizens should be able to formulate a petition for constitutional amendment through their legislators. The legislators should put it in the form required by law. Once formalized through this method it should go to the Commission on Elections as the constitutional body for overseeing elections.

Comelec should then designate a day for citizens to go to their voting precincts for those wishing to sign the petition. That way the signatures are immediately verifiable because the precincts hold the list of voters. After the number of signatures fulfill the requirements of law, a referendum should then be held so that those against can be counted instead of being presumed as the majority even without a vote.