|
Philippine Business Magazine: Volume 8
No.1 - Cover
We Had To Do It Again
People Power showcases the Filipino's
commitment to democracy and good governance
By Guillermo M. Luz
Like Anthony Spaeth wrote in "Oops, We Did it
Again" in TIME Asia's 29 January edition, I, too, was there
at People Power I and II and my view of the events leading up to
both People Power revolutions is starkly different from that of
a visiting journalist who may have difficulty in reading between
the lines. To assert that the crowds were larger and braver on EDSA
in 1986 and that a gentle, inspiring revolution has developed into
a bad habit is to ignore some basic facts.
In 1986, People Power was not a coup against a dictator
which Spaeth says left an unintended and unfortunate legacy that
coups are a legitimate and glorious way to transfer power. The Philippines
is in fact deeply committed to democracy and the protection of the
Constitution. People Power became necessary in 1986 because Mrs.
Aquino won the elections on 7 February 1986 which Marcos and his
friends in Congress were determined to steal from her. An independent
poll count by the National Citizen's Movement for Free Elections
(NAMFREL) had her firmly in the lead. Even the government's own
Commission on Election workers walked out in disgust from the government's
counting center when they saw results openly tampered with. This
was not a coup. This was an assertion of the people's will.
The fact that People Power I was triggered off by a rebel force
in the armed force does not make it a coup. The people simply rushed
to protect a democratic gain that even the rebel forces admitted
had been made in the electoral victory of President Aquino. Years
later, those same military rebels would mount at least six coup
attempts against the Aquino Administration, only to be rebuffed
by the people. Had the rebels succeeded, that would have been the
coup. People Power firmly stayed committed to the Constitution and
the rule of law.
Just as in 1986, People Power II became a necessity
in 2001. It seems curious that journalists from democratized countries
would be so hung-up on the rule of law yet conveniently ignore that
that same rule of law was being subverted in the impeachment trial.
The defense panel representing former President Estrada was determined
to block witnesses, suppress evidence, and declare testimony invalid.
Moreover, Senator-Judges were willing to ignore evidence and even
block its admission into court as those 11 Senators did when they
voted to keep sealed an envelope of bank documents linking former
President Estrada to hidden accounts.
To now suggest that we allow Estrada to "prevail in these tainted
hearings" and then digest the votes of the Senators and throw
them out of office in the next elections is to fall for the propaganda
line of Estrada's crisis public relations team. The Senators were
not on trial; the President was! Elections would have been a false
referendum on the President since he wasn't running for elections.
That People Power II was actually a conspiracy of
the business aristocracy is another one of those lame theories which
sounds good on paper but ignores the actual facts. People Power
II was actually a phenomenon of different sectors in civil society
(including business as well as the silent supporters in government
itself) who drew the line not between political parties, or ideologies,
or the rich and the poor. People Power II was essentially a moral
battle between Right and Wrong and a struggle to regain core values
which we were all taught at a younger age, simple beliefs like truth
and honesty. It's true that Estrada was popular and had a grip on
the Senate. But it's also true that his popularity had eroded significantly
since his assumption into office and that people eventually tired
of the arrogance of political power in the face of the search for
truth. He may have won with a 40% vote in 1998 (which still leaves
60% against him), but that was no license for him to engage in the
things he did as President.
There is no seed for Constitutional disregard in the
Philippines. When we took to the streets in September 1997 against
then-President Fidel Ramos' and again in August 1999 against then-President
Joseph Estrada's attempts to amend the Constitution, it was precisely
to protect the Constitution against the moves of politicians to
fix the rules to allow themselves to be perpetuated in power. Those
circumstances haven't changed. The people still seek good governance
and will, if anything, further strengthen the rule of law and democratic
institutions so that we won't have to go to People Power III again
in our lifetimes.
Finally, to suggest that the solution to discontent
is for People Power to be invoked (monopolized by a certain clique,
as Spaeth asserts) suggests a serious lack of understanding of political
movements. None are ever as whimsical as they seem. Truth to tell,
people like leading normal, quiet, productive lives rather than
heading into the streets to protest. Protest is hard work, especially
protests in the Philippines -- which prides itself in peaceful rallies
to send powerful messages for change. Protests build up because
elected leaders and politicians choose to ignore to read the signs
which stare them in the face. They ignore the signals at their peril,
just like Estrada and his cohorts did.
People Power II was a reasoned and rational move by
the people to restore transparency, accountability, and honesty
in government. The fact that it occurred over wider areas of the
country, and not just in Manila, illustrates how that quest for
truth and change resonated in the hearts and minds of many people
throughout the country. This was not mob rule. This was not whimsical.
This was not accidental. Hell, we had to do it again!
Guillermo M. Luz is the Executive Director
of the Makati Business Club
|
