Enrilegate

The best way to truly appreciate the privilege speech of Senator Miriam Santiago is to base your final judgment on the content of the written word and not just the visual imagery of an angry person confronting a smirking, old man awkwardly playing a game on his gadget. The contents have the makings of what can clearly be called Enrilegate.

I am comparing the contents to the expose of two courageous American journalists, Woodward and Bernstein in the 1970s, of the wide scale cover up of corruption and scandals by top political leaders in the United States. Eventually, Nixon had to resign to avoid impeachment. Many of his allies and officials were indicted and jailed. The whole event —  the web of corruption, expose and political downfall — was infamously called Watergate.

Enrile accused Miriam Santiago of maligning the character of the persons, especially him, who did not attend the Blue Ribbon hearing. I suppose he was referring to the members of the HERMES gang – Honasan, Enrile, Revilla, Marcos, Estrada, Sotto. Please note that if you combine the first letters of their family names, it spells out the word HERMES.

In face of all these charges, the best defense for Enrile and his gang is to simply prove that all the charges are false. Instead they have resorted to personal attacks. Let us assume that Enrile is right that Miriam visited a psychiatrist. Let us assume that Jinggoy Estrada is right that COA head Cora Pulido Tan did take several foreign trips a year. How does this prove their innocence? How does this prove that they are not thieves and plunderers?

Now I hear that Jinggoy Estrada and his father have offered to reconcile the two senators so that they become friends again. I am shocked by this cavalier attitude. In case the term is not familiar to some people, when I use the term “cavalier” the word means “to show arrogance.”

Is this how the Estradas settle accusations of multibillion peso corruption – by asking accusers to resume friendships? Does this mean they are above the law – that accusations should be settled through “friendly” solutions”? Do they mean that any accusation of corruption can only be due to political motives or “unfriendly” people?

Why not let the issue be decided by the courts of law? Or is it because they also believe the judiciary can be corrupted? Why not just tell the people the truth?

The Senate seems to be in a quandary as to what do with Senator Miriam Santiago.  They have accused her of unparliamentary behavior. Also that she is tarnishing the reputation of the Senate.

But is anyone shocked that there are corrupt Senators? The issue now is whether their chamber has the moral courage to investigate the integrity of its own members. Their Blue Ribbon and multiple oversight committees have never hesitated to call numerous other officials to public, televised hearings. This Senate also had the courage to impeach the Supreme Court Justice. So now why the hesitation when it comes to their own members?

Taking away the few personal derogatory terms, the speech of Senator Miriam Santiago is so monumental and in parts can only be described as evil acts that the people of the Philippines should demand an investigation. At the very least.

For example, Enrile was accused of “command responsibility for the death and disappearance during martial law” of close to 4,000 people during the Marcos reign of terror. It is true that those events happened more than three decades ago. But if crimes were committed, as they surely were, then the perpetrators should be punished if and when they are found guilty. After all, the Nazi war criminals who were found guilty of the Holocaust were hunted down and punished for their war crimes decades after the end of the Second World War.

Enrile was also accused of trying to revise his role in Philippine history. Miriam said, “Under President Ferdinand Marcos, he claimed that as defense secretary he was ambushed, thus laying the ground for the imposition of martial law. Under President Corazon Aquino he retracted and admitted that his ambush was faked and staged. Then under President Benigno Aquino III, he retracted and now claims in his memoirs [written by Nelson Navarro], that the ambush was not faked and staged.”

Surely, these are issues that the Commission on Human Rights should investigate.

Miriam also had the audacity to bring out to the public what has been discussed in whispers for many decades. This is claim that Enrile is the “King of a Smuggling Empire.” She is referring to the Cagayan Economic Zone Authority or CEZA.

According to Miriam, “During all this time, in defiance of the Supreme Court ruling banning importation of used cars, CEZA continued its importations. In 2012, car traders imported some 5,400 vehicles contained in 18 shipments. In February 2013, a Japanese cargo ship set off for Port Irene with a shipment of Hummers, Porches, BMWs, Mercedes Benz, Ferrarri, Lamborghini and other used luxury cars.”

Finally, Miriam accused Enrile of being the “mastermind of the biggest plunder case in Philippine history.” During the period 2005 to 2013, Enrile was the biggest recipient of pork barrel amounting to PhP 1.189 Billion. Enrile reportedly gave PhP 641.65 million to syndicates of dummy NGOs run by Napoles. If the PDAF scam mastermind is not discovered and convicted, it is the Senate’s reputation that will suffer the most.

Miriam ended her speech with lines from the Battle Hymn of the Republic. I might have suggested to her the last lines of Emile Zola’s public letter “J’Accuse” (I Accuse), condemning the French military high command of conspiracy to hide the truth from the public:

“The action I am taking is no more than a radical measure to hasten the explosion of truth and justice. I have but one passion: to enlighten those who have been kept in the dark, in the name of humanity which has suffered so much and is entitled to happiness.”

*   *   *

Email: [email protected]