Putting ‘big fishes’ in jail

One of the current big news items is the much anticipated appointment of Justice Secretary Crispin Remulla. The process for selecting Remulla started with a list of 17 applicants who were then interviewed by the Judicial and Bar Council. The public reception to this appointment was extreme. On one side, there was anticipation that Remulla would finally run after Sara Duterte. On the other side, there was apprehension, for better or for worse, that his major task would be to run after the Duterte group.

When he finally takes his oath, he will have two major cases that he would have to contend with. The first is a pending case against Sara Duterte for the alleged misuse of the P600-million confidential funds of the Office of the Vice President. It should be noted that the plunder law says that any amount over P50 million that is misused by a government official is classified as plunder. If found guilty, government officials will be removed from office and imprisoned and held without bail even while the trial is going on. All these judgments are the sole discretion of the ombudsman.

The second category of major cases are all those flood control corruption cases that will be referred to the ombudsman by the Independent Commission for Infrastructure (ICI). If Remulla is able to put all these people in jail, including contractors, senators and congressmen, he will be hailed as a hero by the majority of the Filipino people.

The last ombudsman who was hailed as a fearless and courageous person was Conchita Carpio Morales. However, during her tenure, she ordered Joel Villanueva to be removed from office. This decision was overturned by the Senate. Hopefully, this will not happen during the tenure of Ombudsman Remulla.

As of the date of this writing, no one has been named to succeed Sen. Ping Lacson to head the Senate Blue Ribbon committee. Of the five nominees, two have already declined – Senators JV Ejercito and Raffy Tulfo. Of the remaining nominees, I believe that the most qualified is Sen. Kiko Pangilinan. He has the political courage and an unblemished record of integrity which are the basic requirements to hold this chairmanship. At the same time, he is also a lawyer, which would be a major asset for anyone chairing this committee.

With Crispin Remulla as ombudsman and Kiko Pangilinan as chair of the Blue Ribbon committee, the public can be assured that at least a few “big fish” will end in jail.

If the ICI does its job thoroughly and not bow to any outside pressure, the actions of this troika – ICI, Remulla, Pangilinan – will finally accede to the people’s demands for the “big fishes” to go to jail.

Amidst all these, however, there is need for a word of caution. Even placing the “big fish” in jail will only stop corruption temporarily. In order to completely eradicate corruption in our society, we need to address the root causes of corruption – a topic I have written about in past columns.

*      *      *

Before the 20th century, governments believed that countries could wage wars to seize others’ lands and resources and that in some circumstances, they actually should. War was considered legal and invasion of even independent nations was considered legal. One example was that the United States invaded the Philippines even after the Philippines had declared independence and had drafted its own Constitution.

This all changed in 1928 when nearly every country in the world at that time joined the Kellogg-Briand Pact, agreeing that wars of aggression should be illegal and territorial conquest prohibited. This change in attitude was brought about by the first World War when nations of the world said that there should be an end to all wars.

In 1945, the United Nations Charter reaffirmed and expanded that commitment. The UN agreed to a prohibition on the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of another state.

Wars between nations became far less common. The world also became more peaceful and prosperous. With the start of the 21st century, it seems that the world has again resorted to claiming that wars could be justified.

The use of military threats to advance political or economic demands was used to justify powerful countries to wage war, to pressure countries into signing unequal treaties.

Trump has threatened to use force to acquire Greenland and the Panama Canal. Russia invaded Ukraine, claiming that Ukraine was part of their country. Israel has invaded Palestine even though it had previously signed a treaty recognizing Palestine as a state. China has unilaterally declared the South China Sea as its sole territory, thus violating the sovereign rights of its neighboring nations like the Philippines and Vietnam.

In the future, if the prohibition on the use of force collapses, then Putin, Trump and Xi Jinping can simply agree to carve the world into spheres of influence.

The European Union can become an example. None of its 27 member-states has great power on its own but together they are a force. Midsize and small countries need to form broad coalitions to defend themselves. The lesson is that states can wield real power when they work in concert.