Proper perspective

Never before has an investigation been conducted so openly and with full media coverage than the investigation of the tragic hostage taking incident on August 23, 2010. TV cameras vividly caught the facial expressions and spontaneous reactions of the more than 20 people interrogated. Their raw testimonies were heard over the radio by the entire nation intently watching the proceedings and closely following the unfolding developments during the five day hearings aired live in every network. Hence when the committee created by P-Noy (IIRC) ended its hearings, the contents of its report particularly its findings and recommendations as to who are responsible for the embarrassing fiasco are more or less known to most people already. There is nothing exciting anymore about its submission to P-Noy.

Perhaps more “exciting” now is waiting for P-Noy to finish poring over the 83-page IIRC document before revealing the names of those deemed accountable. The public impression here is that he may, or will, still reject the IIRC findings particularly in regard to the names of the officials and police officers deemed responsible for the botched operation. This seems to be inconsistent with the reason behind the creation of IIRC by P-Noy himself. He deemed it wise and he is correct in entrusting the investigation to a committee than to a particular official or office, not even the Office of the President because a committee can conduct a more independent, exhaustive, extensive and thorough fact finding investigation since it will have more time, expertise and technical capabilities to ferret out the truth. It just does not look right to still review or modify the report now.

Indeed at this stage, excitement is centered on the possible surprise that the report may not contain some of the names mentioned therein. Justice Secretary de Lima, the IIRC chair has already revealed that there are twelve names in the list including officials, policemen and members of the media. She said that their recommendations are “based on the evaluation of the action, non action, missteps, lapses, negligence and incompetence of those involved”. Thus if there will be less than twelve names in the list and if that list does not contain the names of Puno, Lim, Verzosa or Magtibay, eyebrows will certainly be raised and more controversies will ensue. This will just taint the investigation’s credibility.

Besides, the findings of the IIRC do not conclusively establish the guilt or innocence of those deemed responsible anyway. It merely recommends that proper criminal or administrative charges be filed by the government’s prosecuting arm. So it is better to allow the proper court or administrative agencies to rule on the correctness of the IIRC findings after proper trial or hearings where those deemed responsible would either be conclusively cleared or declared guilty.

The report should thus be made public immediately, unless there are glaring and blatant errors resulting in grave injustice or jeopardizing national interest and security, which are highly unlikely anyway.

In this connection, it may be more appropriate to share this piece “walking out of the shadow” written by Fr. Carmelo Diola of the “Dilaab Movement”. He said:

“The shadow of the hostage tragedy will be with us for some time. The day will come however when, like other issues, it shall be covered by the sands of time and other matters of national importance.

We therefore need to take a long, reflective look upon the tragedy to learn from it. When the dusts of emotional agitation, latent racism and finger pointing have settled, will we as a nation emerge stronger? Will our governmental institutions be strengthened and less susceptible to unwarranted political meddling? Will we become more united as a people? I suggest that we focus on three areas.

First, the dysfunctions in our government institutions, from the PNP to the LGUs and other government agencies, as well as the scoop-motivated imprudence of media which contributed to the botched rescue effort. Hard questions need to be asked but not in the spirit of convenient finger pointing, hindsight with axes to grind and political positioning. Incompetence in the areas of knowledge, skills and resources needs to be admitted and effectively addressed. Political meddling and its impact on the rescue effort need to be looked into.

After all if the hostage rescue had been a success, how many politicians would be taking advantage of a photo-op instead of washing their hands? To what extent did the ego of individuals get the better of them in terms of making sound judgment? When fact finding efforts result in concrete recommendations, what mechanism is there to ensure that these are implemented and followed through for a cumulative process of learning? Where are the lessons of the 1989 hostage killing of Brig.Gen Eduardo Batalla and Col. Romeo Abendan in Cawa Cawa, Zamboanga City?

Second, we should not allow this failure to define us as a people. Our prospects of learning from the tragedy hinge upon asserting our God-given dignity as Filipinos, both individually and as a nation. We need to be humble in admitting our failures yet we should not allow ourselves to be bullied and treated as doormats. This is not the first time a rescue attempt failed. Even world military powers had their share of failures: the 2002 Russian Nord-Ost Siege and the 1980 USA Operation Eagle Claw to rescue hostages in Iran are failures that do not define these nations.

We must also remind ourselves that blood was spilled mainly because an armed and agitated man was not stopped in time by a poorly equipped and poorly led SWAT team largely due to error in judgment and governmental dysfunction. It is not a bloodbath for ideological or racial reasons carried out deliberately and methodically. Let our sense of shame at our failure be put in proper perspective.

Third, we have a special calling to strike a balance between faith, democracy and development. We are gifted with tremendous natural resources and we are a very special people who put a human and religious face into globalization. This is the larger picture to be considered; the scales of value which requires us to work hand in hand so that structural and institutional reforms at the technological, economic and political spheres may be attained by cultural transformation. This is not an instant process but a lengthy one requiring loving patience from all citizens, and wise, competent, effective leadership in our journey towards integrity.

E-mail us at [email protected]