What Filipino of the year?

For God's sake, how could anyone, least of all a national newspaper, publicly declare whistleblower Benhur Luy and company as Filipinos of the year? Sure, we should be thankful that they blew the whistle on the P10-billion pork barrel scam. But when did they blow the whistle? And for what reason?

If whistleblowers need to be compensated for their contribution in exposing scams and catching crooks, then let them be compensated appropriately. But let us go easy on declaring them as Filipinos of the year or whatever. Let us not cheapen heroism by make a cottage industry out of dubious heroes.

I am not saying whistleblowers cannot be declared heroes. Of course they can. But let us be very circumspect in the measures we apply to weigh their qualifications. In fact the reason why there is only one Jose Rizal is because there is only one Jose Rizal.

And I think no one in the company of Benhur Luy can come to within a thousand kilometers to being even close to, say, Cory Aquino, who was similarly named Woman of the Year, although by a very much more prestigious publication than Luy's new-found admirers.

Compensating and thanking whistleblowers is easy. But declaring them heroes, or models worthy of emulation, should pass through very exacting standards. That is because most whistleblowers are themselves of the same ilk as those they expose and only crossed the fence when the circumstances changed.

If we need to declare whistleblowers as heroes, or Filipinos of the year or whatever -- and I am not against that -- let us first make sure that they became whistleblowers on their own accord, that they did so because they can no longer go on with the kind of life they have been living.

Unfortunately, in the case of Luy and company, as well as all the other previous whistleblowers who have thus far surfaced, they sure took quite a long time becoming whistleblowers and only did so when, as I said, the circumstances changed.

Luy did not walk through the door to say he is coming in because an angel appeared to him in a dream and told him to repent and reform. He had a falling out with Janet Napoles, a falling out so severe that he had to be rescued from what we are told was an illegal detention.

Sure we can declare Luy as a Filipino of the year. We can even make him a subject in Civics or even in Religion. But don't you think we need to ask him even one question, such as why it took him such a long time to blow the whistle?

By his own narration, he has been doing what he claims he has been doing for years. If he truly found what he was doing too much for his pristine conscience, don't you think he would have waited even a month before he unmasked the people who were stealing from our country?

But no. Luy was merrily in on the whole thing and never thought of whistling, except perhaps on the way to his own bank. It was not until things soured between him and Napoles that he started plotting his revenge. So, is this the kind of person we must declare a Filipino of the year?

A Filipino of the year declaration is supposed to be a very lofty acknowledgement. It should not have been cheapened by getting vested on people who, while truly useful in the prosecution of thieves, are characters that need very careful study before being emulated as role models.

Remember that Luy and company were all with Napoles in the kitchen, cooking up scam after scam. What if the pot didn't boil over or the roast hadn't caught fire? What if everything remained hunky dory with Napoles' recipe and the heat hadn't become unbearable? Would we even know of fake NGOs today?

If we need to compensate Luy then give him a cash reward. That is what we do if we need help in catching criminals, right? We offer cash rewards. That would be more appropriate in this case. But if we need to declare a whistleblower a hero, let him or her be one whose coming forward was truthful and uncompromised.