Broken Windows and Broken Doors

Marami ang nagtatanong via e-mail: Bakit nawala si Tikboy after the Manila Pen Seige? Nakasama rin ba siya sa mga hinuling journalists at media practitioners na parang baboy na tinalian at dinala sa slaughterhouse... este, sa Bicutan?

Sorry, hindi po. Medyo nagasgas lang pong masyado ang kanyang keyboard sa kasusulat.

Anyway, there is an interesting story which tries to link how the broken windows theory has further deteriorated the administration of Gloria Arroyo. The piece is entitled: From Broken Windows to a Broken Administration and can be accessed at www.politech.blogspot.com.

Kaya siguro mas lalong bumaba ang rating ng administrasyon dahil pinto na winawasak nila. Hmmnnn... :)

But kidding aside, the seige was a loose-loose situation for Malacanang. It bared how dissatisfied the people are against the sitting president. In streets, for example, many are cursing Senator Antonio Trillanes not because he has staged a putsch but because he easily surrendered thereby failing the expectations of an Arroyo government overthrown. Corroborating this is the fact that many civilians have expressed their willingness to participate (with a number who even participated already) despite the fact that the show was designed to be an all-military affair.

According to whispering spirits, the show was just to test the preparedness of the government. And the Manila Pen cast did really find out how the reaction was and would be. In a sense, the show was a success in itself-- revealing the weakness of the administration.

Third, the show also scored high against the administration. Even ordinary people -- whether streetboys or homebuddies -- are united in saying that the administration's response was an overkill. With 30 men to be crippled, the government used battalions of the PNP and the AFP -- ain't that an overkill? They even destroyed the doors of the Manila Pen, arrested and detained the media and imposed a martial law-like curfew.

With these brewing in the polity, the Arroyo administration should therefore step back and make a necessary introspection. Baka nga di nila nasasagot ang pangangailangan ng mga tao. Baka patchy palliatives lang ang ginagawa nila. Worse, baka nga kailangan na nilang mag-resign.

Trillanes's continuing detention, not a voice of the people

Many looking for complicated arguments just to let Senator-Elect Antonio Trillanes go out of his detention cell and perform his functions as a member of the Upper House. Pero simple lang naman ang argumento diyan.

First, the President of the Philippines has a power to grant pardon and amnesty. Pero saan ba galing ang powers na yan? Sabi sa Article 2 ng 1987 Constitution:

Section 1. The Philippines is a democratic and republican State. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from them.

In a sense, the president cannot exercise his/her powers to grant pardon and amnesty without the blessing of the people.

Second, If the President is a delegatee of the powers to grant pardon and amnesty, it therefore follows that the people also has those powers. Sabi nga: One cannot delegate which he/she doesn't have.

Which boils down to the third proposition: The people elected Trillanes. This is despite the fact that there are 37 choices for the position. And this, despite the fact that Trillanes is facing charges for his "criminal acts". The very simple conclusion is that the people simply condones whatever acts Trillanes may have committed. O di ba?

Say ni Fr. Joaquin Bernas na isang constitutionalist? Kahit si Senator Brenda Santiago pa ang tanungin natin.

The Trillanes's Mandate

The editorial of Inquirer is quite incisive. To quote:

Should [Sen. Antonio Trillanes IV] accused of leading a coup d'etat be allowed either temporary or conditional liberty, to allow him to discharge his duties as a new member of the Senate? Should he enjoy a change in his custody status, from military detention to perhaps the custody of the Senate? Not least, should his election to the Senate, on the strength of over 11 million votes, be considered as absolving him of his liability?

A friend who is now a Dutch citizen lamented that in the Philippines, anybody who wants to be a senator must first stage a coup d' etat. Just like Honasan and Trillaness. Such a thinking, he continued, makes the Filipinos an "inexplicable political morons".

(Well, my friend isn't Miriam Santiago. Too bad he isn't that we can't rid a country with at least one genius liar.)

Well I may not be proud to be a Filipino. Neither am I proud to be an inexplicable political moron. But if such a moronic state could give sanity to elections, so be it. The way I read the signs, the election of Trillanes simply means a wake up call to those "seated in the most high". If the Filipinos are satisfied, why would they exchange chocolates for "delimon"? Or a castle for a "barong-barong"? Nobody would even want a "tinapa" in exchange for a beefsteak (unless he/she is a Hindi).

At first I also believe that the Filipinos are an irrational voter. It's hard to predict what they want and who will they choose. Add the mud that the Catholic church spread by saying "Ang pera sa bulsa, ang boto sa balota". But th was before. It was only lately that I realized Filipinos are what Samuel Popkins call as a "Reasoning Voter". They vote retrospectively and prospectively. They want to punish their officials for not performing well, and they sometimes have "moronic" choices because they think that someday, somehow, things will still change. And for that reason, they chose Trillanes.

But as to Inquirer's question on the fate of Trillanes, the only possible reply is: Read the signs. The signs are clear and these are written already on the ballot.