Dear Senate Media,
In the stories filed about the Senate vote on the ARMM bill yesterday, some of you noted that I had changed my position: I view the bill as constitutional, and voted in its favor.
However, certain reporters chose to read bad faith on my part, and imply that in effect, I have turned into a political monkey, turning somersaults in the air. That is unfair.
My reply is to quote Churchill: “Consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.” In the Constitution, “synchronization” is a mere casual phrase in the Transitory Provisions. That is why, a few months ago, when you in the media asked hypothetical questions, I said that I was against poll postponement. My view was that “synchronization” has no constitutional mandate.
But after the House version officially reached the Senate, I hit the books. I was astonished to learn that in the 1991 case of Osmeña v. Comelec, the Supreme Court said that the mere phrase “synchronization of elections” had turned into nothing less than “a constitutional mandate.” From a casual phrase into a “mandate” takes some doing!
That is why I changed my opinion. I think that the Supreme Court might have committed error, but puny me must abide by the ruling. The Supreme Court is always right. I have labored to explain why as a lawyer, I am constrained to obey the Supreme Court, although as a politician I might think otherwise. I thought that this mental process was obvious in my written speech that was distributed to you, and in my ad lib remarks when I delivered it on the floor. I even went so far as to query whether you wanted to interview me during session, but I was prevented from leaving session hall early enough for your deadline.
I did have an appointment at noon with President Aquino before the session. Mostly, we talked about certain pressing issues of international law, which in addition to constitutional law, is also my field of interest. I expressed my considered opinions on such issues as the Spratlys, as I have also done on other topics, on the request of previous presidents. I have always chosen to keep silent on these private consultations. NO MENTION WAS EVER MADE OF MY VOTE ON THE ARMM BILL. And in any event, I could not have written a legal opinion with cited cases just one hour before session!
Journalism is literature in a hurry. But I am very sad that despite my written speech, some of you, who work in proximity to me, seem to think that I am capable of exchanging intellectual conviction for political gain. This is my last senatorial term, and I have nothing to gain from the administration. But generally, I will support a sitting president, because that job is torture.
I have been in bad health for over a year now, but I soldier on. I am sometimes absent. I am in pain. I just feel sad. And sick. And tired.
Sincerely yours, Sen. MIRIAM DEFENSOR SANTIAGO