Don’t you find it odd that nobody, or at least only very few people, have criticized Senator Bongbong Marcos for voting to acquit Renato Corona in the just-concluded impeachment trial at the Senate?
To recall, Bongbong was one of only three senators who went against the 20 others whose overwhelming majority resulted in Corona’s conviction and immediate removal as chief justice of the Philippines.
The implication that lurked under the charge of culpable violation of the Constitution was that Corona was corrupt, unethical, and unfit to serve any further as chief justice. That Bongbong chose to vote to acquit would have invited instantaneous criticism and condemnation.
After all, Bongbong is the son and namesake of Ferdinand Marcos, one of the most reviled presidents the Philippines ever had. The late strongman who clamped the country under martial law was accused of far worse things than Corona.
For Bongbong to side with Corona, therefore, would have invited the continuing attacks that people have relentlessly reserved for the memory of those dark years in our history. And yet strangely it appears that, by some unspoken measure, people decided to pass Bongbong over.
The only plausible reason why people decided not to criticize and condemn Bongbong for siding with Corona is that doing so would make it necessary to also criticize and condemn the two other senators who voted similarly — Joker Arroyo and Miriam Defensor Santiago.
But how can anyone with an open mind and a fairly good sense of what is right, fair and just take it upon himself or herself to criticize and condemn Arroyo and Santiago, given the clear, honest and unassailable reasons with which they anchored their votes to acquit.
One day, when this is all behind us, when the popular shall have given way to hindsight and the truth, the speeches of Arroyo, Santiago and Marcos will prove to be far more enduring and valuable than the motherhood but popularly necessary speeches made by the 20 other senators.