Silencing a Karen

Karen Davila, veteran broadcaster, is accused of fake news. The vice president has denied she ever considered reviving the ill-gotten wealth sleuth Presidential Commission on Good Government (PCGG) to run after the Marcos wealth, (or more accurately, to continue chasing the stolen funds that have yet to be returned), and she has thus threatened Ms. Davila with appropriate legal action for spreading the very idea.

Also, was that an insult we just saw? There seemed to be a diminution in stature involved, as the journalist was, in the press release issued by the veep, demoted to a mere “TV newsreader”. Who knew she could be subtle.

It is farfetched for Ms. Davila to have manufactured the PCGG nugget out of thin air. Most probably, it came from a source, trusted enough for her to have acted on it. It is puzzling to think that Ms. Davila would have relied on sources that weren’t legitimate, but then again, so many journalists have been burned by lapses. Is this one such case? We shall have to wait and see to find out whether she is able to shed more light on the surprising imbroglio.

But Ms. Davila occupies just a very small space out of the whole shebang. The loud and quite frankly, disproportionate, pronouncements against her from the office of the vice evade many other more fundamental aspects, and deflect from more serious issues.

First, there is the substance of the interview itself. Ms. Davila presented former PCGG commissioner Ruben Carranza, now currently stationed in New York as an NYU professor, about the PCGG’s supposed utility for Sara Duterte. Atty. Carranza was visibly amused, and responded with the wry observation that as a current vice president, Sara can do many things about the Marcos debts without even having to wait until she becomes president.

Carranza points out that there is the existing conviction against Imelda Marcos, while she is still out enjoying bail. There is also the tax judgment in the billions, which is awaiting enforcement. Carranza wonders why Sara Duterte and her supporters aren’t paying these cases any attention.

Great points. And now that Sara has been made aware of his viewpoints, why focus only on Ms. Davila?

Second, whether or not Sara reacts to Carranza’s suggestions, the matter of the Marcos wealth and the judgment of the courts have been publicly brought to her attention (again). Without even needing to refer to the interview, what is her stance on the restitutible cash? Does she believe the Marcoses should pay up?

Sara can very well state her own position on these points. She has a voice. A very loud one, with millions of Filipinos hanging on to her every word. What’s her take? What does she want her supporters to believe? To fight for? Truly, anti-corruption?

That would be consistent with her public speeches decrying the trillions in debt taken out by the current Marcos government. Why doesn’t she also pound on the sovereign debt taken during the original Marcos government? It would be so easy for her to do so, something pundits would label as “low-hanging fruit”.

Third, what’s puzzling is that she has been so critical of the Marcos family, promising a bloodbath if she is impeached, all the while linking the president and his family to Congressional efforts to unseat her. So why isn’t she latching on to this issue and using it as a cudgel for her to hit them?

Is there something about ill-gotten wealth that she doesn’t want to touch just as yet? Is she wary of it as a weapon of choice? And why should she be wary, if so? I have my own answers, but in Law school we called it the Socratic method of teaching.

Picking a fight with a news journalist on supposed fake news seems petty compared to these larger issues. But then, it’s an acknowledged ploy by authoritarians to pound on journalists, and get them to heel. Textbook playbook. Is Sara now familiarizing herself with the tools of that trade?

You tell me.