Lessons learned

“There is nothing concealed that shall not be revealed”. This is the scriptural passage that immediately comes to mind in connection with the Estrada-Lacson verbal skirmishes. The more they tangle, the more facts come out and the more stories erstwhile considered as mere rumors now appear and sound true after all. This confrontation between former “partners in…. public service” is definitely contributing to the promotion of sorely needed transparency in all transactions involving public interest and matters of public concern that the present administration utterly lacks although mandated by the Constitution (Section 28 Article II; Section 7, Article III).

Never mind if the clash is a “mutually assured destruction” as Senator Miriam Santiago, a known Estrada ally, describes it. Undoubtedly the confrontation is something good for the country. A vast majority of Filipinos surely welcome every bit of information coming out of this bitter tussle and they certainly would not like it to end abruptly until all the “facts” are in. And since both protagonists have manifested a “no fear” facade, public opinion will mercilessly sway against the one who blinks first.

It is also fitting and proper that the face-off is played first before the court of public opinion rather than before the court of law. The issues and matters involve here are not strictly private and personal but mainly affect public interest and pertain to official acts of which the people has a right to know. Besides in a court of public opinion, more information can easily be revealed, gathered and submitted as it is not hampered by strict technical rules that sometimes serve as the main barriers to the determination of the truth. Indeed, more information coming out means more leads for government investigators and prosecutors in gathering necessary and competent evidence for the filing and prosecution of the proper charges before the courts of law. And because the public has already been properly kept informed and regularly updated, a possible whitewash of the case will be difficult if not impossible.

Apparently Estrada started the imbroglio when he tried to wash his hands off the Dacer-Corbito murder case at the expense of Lacson after Mancao implicated both of them in his testimony in the said case. So he must have the necessary ammunition to defend himself and show that his hands are really clean not only in Dacer-Corbito murder case but in all other cases that Lacson may be privy to.

For this purpose, it is not enough for Estrada to come up with bare denials. Neither could Estrada do it by trying to destroy the credibility of Lacson’s expose and of Lacson himself with such tactics as repeatedly pounding on Lacson’s alleged motive to deflect public attention away from his complicity in the murder case; on his alleged inordinately late timing that renders his revelations highly doubtful; and on the alleged hand of Malacañang as the mastermind behind the damning revelations purely driven by politics. But showing that the motive and timing are wrong and that the move is politically orchestrated by the Palace does not automatically prove that the revelations themselves are inherently false and incredible. The dubious motive, wrong timing and the masterminding of a witness may affect his credibility but not the inherent truth and credibility of what he says which must still be shown as pure falsehoods by concrete evidence with probative value and not by bare denials. A witness may not be credible but what he says may still be inherently true.

In the current controversy now pending before the court of public opinion Lacson seems to have the upper hand. And this is because his exposes in his privilege speech appear to be more credible and truthful as they are corroborated by other witnesses and by events and circumstances of person, time and place actually happening. Jinggoy’s refutation of the Lacson charges in his privilege speech appears to have plenty of rhetoric but short on substance as it consist mainly of branding Lacson’s exposes as kasinungalingan without even showing why. 

The jueteng payola and the pay offs on rice and chicken smuggling did happen. They have already been reported in media. They were not just figments of the imagination except that their investigations were aborted by supervening events. To be sure it would be good for Estrada if investigations on these matters be renewed so that he could finally and conclusively clear his name considering that he wants to become President again. But he must come up with something more than bare denials and rhetoric because there are already reasonable grounds to believe that the charges are true. He must present clear and convincing evidence to the contrary.

The alleged forced sale of Yuchengco’s PTIC shares in PLDT on the other hand has even been corroborated by the seller himself. The buyer will naturally insist that the transaction is above board to avoid complicity and to preserve the consummated transaction since it amounts to billions of pesos. But more significant here is that as corroborated by another witness several billion pesos were also forked out under the table and Estrada’s name was mentioned as one of the recipients. It is good that Estrada has decided to file a libel suit in court. Now the truth will be finally determined in accordance with the rules.

The Lacson-Estrada tiff has undoubtedly opened our eyes to several facts from which lessons can be learned. First that the powers of the President are so vast and could be easily abused and kept hidden even with the principle of checks and balances in place. Power indeed corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Hence we should carefully choose the person in whom we will entrust that power. Second, even if Estrada is correct in arguing that he could still run again as President and insist in doing so, putting him back in power under such a cloud of doubt is potentially risky and may bring us back to the same situation leading to another debilitating upheaval.

But the most significant eye-opener here is that with the ratting of Estrada and Lacson against each other following the Mancao testimony implicating both of them in the Dacer-Corbito murder, it would appear that both have something to do with it.

* * *

E-mail at: [email protected]