|
It must
have been very painful for former senator Kit Tatad to
write, much less release, his now much-talked-about
letter to former President Joseph Ejercito Estrada dated
January 15, 2007.
The
pain, evident all over the seven-page missive, is such
that the good senator has not favored us with a return
call or even an interview over our daily radio program “Karambola.”
As a good friend and someone who has shared many of his
advocacies for truth, freedom and the national welfare,
I had wanted to find out more about the reasons which
prompted him to sever his ties with the United
Opposition at a time when most everybody thought
everything was bright and dandy on the
antiadministration front.
He must
know something(s) most of us ordinary mortals do not.
Things which should be very, very helpful in clearing
the air, so to speak, on critical issues confronting the
country, the various political groupings and, of course,
the voting public in this period of half-lies,
exaggerations, obfuscations or fabrications. A savvy
politician and seasoned political observer, Tatad does
not commit his beliefs and analysis about a given
situation or of future development to writing and allow
distribution of the same without good reason.
And,
this time around his beef with President Erap, whom he
considers a friend of long standing, is the wisdom of
having a “Unity Ticket” whose principal reason for being
is essentially a shared antipathy toward President
Arroyo and her administration.
In
Tatad’s view, this midterm election is such a decisive
moment for the country’s future that putting together a
loose amalgam of personalities and groupings, a number
of whom actively participated in Estrada’s ouster and
continuing demonization, mainly on that basis does not
augur well for our people and even for the opposition.
It is such a soft, shallow and ultimately questionable
basis for political action. It is a contrived, if not
unprincipled, foundation for unity.
As one
observer noted, it makes the “Unity Ticket” a coalition
of convenience more than anything else. Which is a pity,
of course, as it puts the group on the defensive when it
has all the ammunition in the world to blast this
administration for its sins and failings after six years
at the helm.
But what
puts even more sting to Tatad’s agonizing is the
possibility of having members of the same nuclear family
in the 24 member Senate at the same time. Thus, he
noted: “. . . I had to die in that meeting to be able to
say the first line of a long sentence. I had already
lost too many friends because of politics, and I did not
want to lose any more than I already have. But the truth
needed to be said, and nobody seemed willing to say it.
I had to take the risk. The ancients said it so well:
‘Amicus Plato, amicus Socrates, sed magis amica veritas’
[Plato is dear to me, Socrates is dear, but the truth is
dearer still].”
He was
referring to the inclusion of Rep. Alan Peter Cayetano,
Mayor J. V. Ejercito and lawyer Aquilino “Koko” Pimentel
III in the opposition ticket which he believed was not
only in violation of the Constitution but “simply of
ethics.”
Thus,
Tatad added: “. . . This was not a question of the
Constitution and the law, but simply of ethics—of what
is right and proper. Article II, Sec 26 of the
Constitution says, ‘The State shall guarantee equal
access to opportunities for public service and prohibit
political dynasties as maybe defined by law.’ No
enabling law has been enacted, but we have a serious
moral duty to live by the spirit of the Constitution,
and not to make the problem of dynasties any more messy
than it already is.
“Political dynasties are either appreciated or hated,
tolerated or feared. But even in the worst of cases,
dynastic family members try simultaneously to occupy as
many different offices as possible, or else alternate or
rotate in holding on to a particular office that allows
them to exercise power. Never do they sit together in
the same office at the same time. This is precisely what
the three young men’s senatorial bid threatens to alter.
“. .
.The obvious assumption is that the voters are so pissed
off with GMA that they will eat any kind of dung we give
them. This is false. We cannot have such a very poor
opinion of our people. But should error and madness
prevail, three families would be holding Senate
seats—one fourth of the Senate—after May 2007.
Thereafter, 12 or eight or six families could end up
controlling all 24 seats. Husbands and wives, together
with their sons and daughters, and uncles and aunties,
why not, could end up running as one big gang. You, Mr.
President, and we, your friends in UNO, have a special
responsibility to make sure this does not even begin to
happen.”
Well,
obviously, President Erap and the inner core of the UNO
leadership had other thoughts in mind. So, as we are
advised, when Tatad’s plea was left unanswered after a
week of agonizing on both sides the good senator made
his move. Whether his leaving will be permanent or not
remains to be seen. And whether the voters will be
persuaded by his arguments only the results of this
crucial elections will show. Abangan . . . .
. . .
Another agonizing front
Agonizing is not limited to the political front. Last we
heard, the PCGG and GSIS are agonizing over what to do
with the Supreme Court’s junking of the sale of 5.5
million SMC shares worth P1.45 billion which forms part
of the block of 33 million sequestered shares which
remains under litigation before the Sandiganbayan.
Instead
of approving the sale, the High Court ordered the graft
court to speed up the resolution of the 20-year-old case
pending before it. The problem, it seems, is that a lot
of monies have been disposed of as a result of the
questioned sale, a good portion of which may not be
available for “reacquisition” anymore.
This SC
ruling can also bring to the fore a number of
questionable PCGG initiatives in some sequestered
companies involving billions of pesos dispensed with
simply by the agency’s say so which may haunt a lot of
people and companies, many of whom remain close to the
powers that be, no end. So the agonizing is truly deep
and painful, literally or otherwise. Tsk. . . Tsk. .
. |
