It’s February and the hot and humid air is spiked with the tragedies of the past, the controversies of the present and the travesties of the future. This month, as we remember EDSA 1986 and recall ULTRA 2006, we also mark the official start of the national campaign period. There have been a lot of interesting developments related to the elections.
For instance, recent headlines related to some Supreme Court rulings have got a lot of people asking, what’s wrong with this picture?
Exhibit A- according to the February ruling of the high court, appointed officials who are running for office must quit their post. The December 2009 decision—which allowed appointed officials to run and maintain their office—has been reversed, with the court arguing that “public safety and interest demand such reversal.” The earlier ruling was also deemed “contrary to and/or violative of the constitutional proscription against the participation of public appointive officials and members of the military in partisan political activity,” according to the Supreme Court resolution.
COMELEC Commissioner Rene Sarmiento welcomed the Supreme Court February reversal, saying “This now levels the playing field for all candidates because the undue advantage of sitting officials is removed.”
Exhibit B- also this February, the Supreme Court did not find anything objectionable to the COMELEC decision on the GMA disqualification case, in effect clearing her bid for the House seat of the 2nd District of Pampanga. According to the COMELEC, there are no constitutional provisions barring the president from running for Congress in May. Akbayan Representative Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel argued that the president should be disqualified also in view of her undue advantage and influence. She also said that Arroyo’s candidacy violates Article VII, Section 4 of the Constitution, which states that the president is not eligible for reelection.
The COMELEC denied the petition for lack of merit, stating that if the intent was to prohibit any reelection, including other positions then it would have been worded so. The Supreme Court did not find any grave abuse or object to this ruling.
Without getting into the fine print of these two decisions, what we’re hearing right now is this—
Sitting officials have to resign, but a sitting president can run for Congress, even if both enjoy undue advantage that come with their positions.
This just doesn’t add up (parang hindi nagtutugma), says Mang Sam, the cab driver I was talking to the other day. I would agree and this ‘common sense’ understanding might even resonate with the original intent of the framers of the post-Edsa constitution. Insulating public offices from partisan political activity goes hand in hand with the rationale behind why we’re barring the president from re-election, and why we’re putting in place provisions that would prevent the president from using/abusing her command over the vast resources, machinery and power of the state to hold on to power. These are safeguards against the kind of abuses of power witnessed during the dictatorship, which are still prevalent today.
The need for safeguards against abuses—of government officials and the president-- is further backed up by events in recent history. In 2004, the presidential elections unraveled with countless controversies, after incumbent president, Mrs Arroyo, reneged on her Rizal Day declaration (when she said she would not run for President) and joined the electoral race to seek a fresh term. Street-sweepers wearing shirts emblazoned with the president’s name, Philhealth cards bearing the president’s photo distributed to voters in her rival’s strong holds, the malversation of fertilizer funds into the president’s campaign kitty, and the Hello Garci ‘one-million-vote lead’ special ops are just some of the most remembered examples of undue advantage and abuses of an incumbent. With her hands on the vast power, machinery and resources of the state, the President enlisted cabinet secretaries and officials along with public offices and agencies, even some segments of the military, and so forth—all fully-mobilized with the single-minded, partisan goal of securing the presidential spot for Gloria Arroyo in 2004. State departments such as the DSWD (Department of Social Welfare and Development) and the COMELEC (Commission on Election) have been transformed into this invincible political machinery for carrying out institutionalized electioneering and fraud.
In 2010, all these can play a key part of President Arroyo’s arsenal for her congressional bid in Pampanga’s 2nd district. For example, according to Akbayan Representative Risa Hontiveros, GMA already poured in 459 million pesos worth of infrastructure projects in her district in 2009. This ‘excessive spending’ in 2009 is nine times more the infrastructure allocation given per congressman annually and exceeds the P1.50 per voter cap set, says Rep. Hontiveros.
Another dimension of GMA’s unfair advantage can be linked to the Panlilio-Pineda in Pampanga case. The recent ruling on the Panlilio-Pineda recount is considered a political move that advances the president’s interest. For one, this is viewed as ‘vendetta politics’ aimed at opposition bets such as Among Ed of Pampanga and Grace Padaca of Isabela, who are affiliated with the Liberal Party. At the same time, the installation of an Arroyo ally as governor of Pampanga during the critical stretch of the elections again gives GMA a strategic upper hand in steering electoral outcomes.
This February, the results of the COMELEC recount indicated that Pineda won the 2007 gubernatorial race, garnering 190,279 votes against Panlilio’s 188,718 votes. Lilia Pineda and her husband Bong Pineda are openly acknowledged supporters of GMA and widely believed to be the lords of jueteng (the illegal numbers game) in Pampanga.
TABLE 1. GMA and Key Cabinet Members in the 2010 Race: Is Malacanang moving to the Lower House?
|
NAME |
CURRENT POSITION |
ELECTIONS 2010 |
|
Gloria Macapagal Arroyo |
President |
Congress 2nd DISTRICT, PAMPANGA |
|
Eduardo Ermita |
Executive Secretary |
Congress 1st DISTRICT, BATANGAS |
|
Rolando Andaya, Jr. |
Budget Secretary |
Congress CAMARINES SUR |
|
Agnes Devanadera |
Justice Secretary |
Congress 1st District, QUEZON |
|
Arthur Yap |
Agriculture Secretary |
Congress 3RD District, BOHOL
|
The way it is now, as far as the law is concerned, GMA is all set to claim ‘her son’s’ district in Pampanga. For some, this also signals, or at least strengthens the argument that the Gloria in Congress, Gloria for Speaker, Gloria for PM scenario is underway. Judging from the Congressional bets this year, there seems to be a number of Arroyo allies and relatives gunning for a seat at the Lower House, enough to maintain a formidable bloc. Among her Cabinet secretaries running for Congress are Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita, Justice Secretary Agnes Devanadera, Agriculture Secretary Arthur Yap and Budget Secretary Rolando Andaya, Jr.; Her running relatives include her son Dato, her brother in law Iggy, and her sister-in-law. Her son, Mikey, who is currently the Congressman of the 2nd district of Pampanga where GMA is running, is said to be considering ‘offers’ to run under the party list. Her other son Dato, is currently holding the Camarines Sur seat which Budget Secretary Andaya occupied before serving in the Arroyo cabinet. With Andaya back in the running for 2010, the House of Representatives passed a law just in time to ‘reapportion’ the districts in Camarines sur to accommodate both Andaya and Dato Arroyo.
Such developments demonstrate how willing and able the Arroyos are when it comes to abusing power, using or twisting the law to favor themselves.
As Mang Sam tells me, “Pagdating sa batas parang wala tayong magawa para mapigilan sila. Parang na-technical lang, pero malinaw naman kung bakit dapat ipagbawal. ” (When it comes to the law, it seems we can’t do anything to stop them. We seem to be losing by technicality, even if it’s clear why these things should be stopped.)
This reflects some discussions regarding the legacy and limits of EDSA. While it restored formal democracy, there’s still a lot that needs to be done in terms of dismantling the entrenched grip of families like the Arroyos, who use and abuse processes, mechanisms and institutions for their own benefit. In the warped universe of post-Edsa liberal democracy, the façade of the formal may serve as the scaffolding for stifling and subverting the substantial components of democracy that we still have to struggle for.
