AS communist terrorists tried to reestablish a foothold in Negros, the country’s fourth largest island, by staging ambuscades and other terror activities, initially killing 15, including four policemen, I remember the late Gen. Guillermo Pecache, a distinguished Philippine Military Academy alumnus (Class of 1951) and himself a respected lawyer, who wrote an enlightening subject on terrorism and human rights.
As president of the Asian Institute of Strategic Studies and the Philippine Chapter of the Asia-Pacific League for Freedom and Democracy before he died, Pecache said:
“Those who insist that no threat or danger can ever justify the curtailment of certain human rights, stand on a lofty cloud of idealism, yet would not hold themselves responsible for the deaths of innocents. Their impassioned arguments only make it possible for terrorists and the lawless elements to move about freely and exploit human rights and liberties to violate those of others.
“Terrorism is a clear, present and actual danger that compels many to contemplate whether human rights should have primacy over human lives.
“For those who understand the true concept of democracy, moral confusion is not a problem since always the first and highest consideration would be the welfare of the majority of the people, the national interest, public order and public safety much as legitimate demands of minorities and even deviants are accommodated.
“It would be worthwhile to go back to that basic document, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, a document that enumerates a long list of rights and people tend to overlook its concluding two Articles, without which the preceding rights would not be viable.
“Although couched in diplomatic language, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights unequivocally affirms that terrorists have no human rights. It tells us that the enjoyment of human rights is subject to the democratic requirements of public order and the general welfare.”
The 1987 Constitution, crafted after President Corazon C. Aquino took over the presidency after the 1986 People Power revolt, made martial rule and the suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus virtual impossibilities and of limited potency, making their declaration by the president, as well as their duration, subject to the pleasure of Congress and/or of the Supreme Court.
Provisions of the Constitution also make the Republic prone to instability, particularly the shortened terms of office of public officials and limitations on successive uninterrupted terms. While the intentions for these are noble, these have only induced dynasties, discontinuity of policies and excessive politicking at the expense of public service.
The most glaring weakness of the current charter is less in its text rather than its non-implementation. Of what use are the provisions on elections, impeachment and recall when presidents can be deposed anytime, and the resulting extra-constitutional succession or take-over ratified or legitimized in unorthodox ways or those inconsistent with laws?
Thus, it is a great wonder if the Philippines, which is “democratic and Republican state,” as the 1987 Constitution phrases it, can develop the strength it needs to become competitive internationally and stable internally.
In addition to structural changes based mainly on constitutional amendments, it appears that what is needed to mold a stronger Republic from the national security viewpoint is a disciplined citizenry, responsible government and a fervor for national unity and patriotism as is being done by President Duterte.
Not saying that democracy does not figure in the equation, it must be pointed out that in the 33 years of democracy that have transpired since the 1986 Edsa incident, the Republic has yet to enjoy a meaningful moment of strength, said the best-selling book, A Country Imperiled, authored by this writer and published in 2011 by Amazon, one of the world’s largest publishing houses.
“Always, the nation wallows in insecurity and instability, not knowing when fuel and power prices will rise again, or whether the current president will complete his or her term, or when the next coup d’état will come, or where terrorists, kidnappers and criminal syndicates might strike next, or which bank or company will collapse soon or whether the government will make compromises in negotiating peace with rebels,” said the book’s introduction written by the late Dr. Galileo Kintanar Sr.
The practice of democracy is not alien to Filipino temperament and the theory that Asians find greater security or comfort in despotism is hardly applicable to the country. This is so because in the Philippine setting, the practice of democracy has been long on freedoms, rights and privileges and short on being responsible, dutiful and disciplined.
Still, hope remains for the Republic of the Philippines. Japan and Germany, which are both devastated worse than the country at the end of World War II, have since become world economic powers. Apparently, their citizens and leaders were more patriotic, disciplined, united and resolute. The Republic, never having been a world power, not even an Asian power, is still developing its unity and strength, the process slow and erratic. If the country is weak, it is less because others are stronger, but more because of its inherent faults. Filipinos and others, who do not want the Republic to be strong, have condemned the people to the cruel consequences of weakness.
They confuse strength with war, weakness with peace. But soon they shall discover their folly, for as evolution proceeds, only the strong survives.
To reach the writer, e-mail cecilio.arillo@gmail.com.