Right to Rule: Joseph Marcelo Ejrcito Estrada - Assignment Example

Right to Rule (or whatever you choose to call it) By Your Your Day Month 2005 Joseph Marcelo Ejército Estrada, affectionately known as Erap, was ousted from his position as president of the Philippines in a manner inconsistent with the country’s constitutional laws. After being accused of receiving money from a various illegal operations (accusations propounded by his chief of staff Aprodicio Laquian), he was given an unfair trial and then required to resign under pain of removal by a mob. The bodies and organizations involved in this unfair treatment of the former president span the spectrum, including businessmen, the church, and the military. In fact, the withdrawal of military support at such a crucial time in the trial and in the country’s history, as well as the other circumstances involved, gives strong evidence in favor of an organized coup d’ état. However, though the Supreme Court allowed itself to be bullied into submission, the country now has the chance to right the wrong committed four years ago and reinstate Estrada as president. Many things stand in favor of this. Therefore, though Chief Justice Davide and GMA stole the presidency from Erap and the Filipino people, now there is a chance that this injustice might be reversed. The truth regarding the conduct of former president Estrada has never really been sought by the Philippine Supreme Court. Over the past four years and with little success, Estrada’s lawyer has repeatedly sought an audience with the justices of that court, arguing that his client had not received a fair trial. According to the constitution of the Republic of the Philippines, attorneys are allowed to call into question judgments made by the Supreme Court, provided the attorney act respectfully, in accordance with the law, and also provided that the faith of the people in the judicial system is not harmed. The law has made allowance for the fallibility of the Supreme Court and agrees to hear any respectful and warranted complaint brought against it. The truth of this was, however, not evident in the Court’s handling of the appeals made by attorney Alan F. Paguia in defense of President Estrada. Rather, he has been accused of “seeking to breathe life into the carcass of a long-dead issue” (CITATION). These and other similar accusations were made after Paguia, upon going before the Sandiganbayan, requested the following: First, that President Estrada be given the opportunity to vindicate himself and prove that he was not allowed to have a fair trial; and second, that Panganiban and several of the other key players in the prosecution’s case be issued a subpoena to provide documents that prove their support of the edict that proclaimed Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo as the new president of the Republic of the Philippines. However, this motion was denied and Paguia declared by the court to be belligerent and seeking to incite public mistrust of the judicial system. His behavior was described as “an obstinate display of defiance” (CITATION). Furthermore, it was said that “in liberally imputing sinister and devious motives and questioning the impartiality, integrity, and authority of the members of the Court, Atty. Paguia has only succeeded in seeking to impede, obstruct, and pervert the dispensation of justice” (CITATION). Consequently, his license to practice law was indefinitely suspended by the Sandiganbayan. To allow himself to be barred from his profession, it would appear that Paguia, in making those appeals in the behalf of President Estrada, was acting upon a principle. In fact, he appears to have been morally obliged to assert these claims because of the manner in which the original case was handled. The components of the four-pronged charges in the case against President Erap are all monetary in nature. They consist of funds received from illegal gambling (jueteng), funds from the tobacco excise tax, commissions received from Bell Corporation, and owning an account in the name of Jose Velarde. These allegations were brought against the president almost solely with the aid of a witness to whom Lawrence Levitt, a United States district court judge, has referred as a “demonstrably corrupt Philippine government official” (CITATION). The prosecution’s case against Estrada proved to be very weak, and at every turn, the defense showed itself ready with substantial rebuttals. The President was accused of accepting the amount of P545 million from illegal jueteng gambling during the period between November 1998 to August 2000. Legally, when charges like these are brought before the court, the prosecution also has to provide proof in the form of checks, receipts, deposit slips, or the testimony of parties directly involved with the disbursal of the said funds. In this particular case, no one has ever come forward to testify or show concrete proof that any such transactions have ever taken place. In conjunction with these illegal receipts of money, the prosecution has also asserted that the Erap Muslim Youth Foundation was established for the purpose of laundering money illegally received by the president. Contrary to this, all the funds handled by this organization have been legally accounted for. Estrada was also accused of receiving and illegally using money amounting to some P130 million obtained from the tobacco excise tax. These funds were alleged to have been delivered to the president by Charlie Ang and one Singson. However, Singson himself was found to have produced bogus documents that effected the liquidation of withdrawals from the tax fund. Criminal cases were filed against him and eight of his partners, who were mostly government officials. It might be interesting to note that these cases were dismissed against them by Ombudsman Simeon Marcelo. Other details of the case include the fact that only three persons are known to have handled the money at the several Metrobank branches, and all three were employed by Singson. Never was there an appearance of Estrada’s name during these transactions. In addition to this, Singson’s testimony regarding the delivery of the P130 million falls short of practicable. He testified that before reaching Estrada’s residence with the money, he himself left the vehicle at a certain point, but was able to view when Ang entered the president’s driveway. Inspection of the point at which Singson said he alighted showed that it was impossible for him to have seen anything he said he did. The details of his testimony often proved contradictory as well. According to him, the money was placed in four boxes. In truth, that sum could not possibly be fit into four boxes; it would take, at the very least, six and a half. Plus, the weight of such a sum would have amounted to 130 kilograms, which is the equivalent of about two and a half sacks of rice. The physical impossibility for just one man of carrying all the money at once was proven by the defense. With regard to Estrada’s alleged receipt of P189 million in commissions from Bell Corporation, it was actually businessman Jaime Dichaves who received the funds. However, there is nothing illegal about receiving commission from such a company. Nor was such activity unique to the Estrada administration, for the receipt of funds in this manner occurred during the time of his predecessor Fidel Ramos and continued into the time of his successor Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA). There were also testimonies by credible witnesses that the purchase of Bell Corporation shares was aboveboard. Clarissa Ocampo testified that President Estrada owned an account in the name of Jose Velarde. This account contained P3.2 billion. Ocampo indicated via testimony that she was present at Estrada’s signing of several documents pertaining to the account. But Estrada’s name has been found on no document pertaining to the opening or the maintenance of the Jose Velarde account, and the name which does appear (Jaime Dichaves) belongs to one who openly claimed ownership of the account even while the trial was going on. The testimony offered by Ocampo was also in violation of the Banking Secrecy laws, which require that all information regarding accounts be kept confidential unless subpoenas are issued to the representatives of the bank in question. No such subpoenas were issued, and yet no charges have ever been filed against Ocampo or her bank for violating these laws. Ocampo was, however, given a “very generous retirement package by the Equitable-PCI Bank shortly after the Supreme Court upheld Mrs. Gloria Arroyo as a consultant” (CITATION). And the only time Estrada’s name even showed up in accordance with the Velarde account was in recommending an associate for a loan from that account and bank. This loan-request was subsequently denied, suggesting that Estrada had limited influence where that account and its contents were concerned. It is following the presentation of this case that Estrada was coerced into resigning his presidency. In fact, his vice president Mrs. Arroyo admitted that the president was forced to resign upon pain of being mobbed by an enormous crowd outside of the Palace. However, this was the culmination of what was to be, once seen in its entirety, a coup d’ état. When the president was forcefully and illegally removed from office, what ensued was a suspension of the Constitutional Clock. The Office of the President relies upon this important instrument, the Constitutional Clock. It dictates that a Philippine president should serve for six (6) years beginning the moment at which he or she is sworn into office and ending at the time that another president is voted into that same office in another scheduled general election. As a president cannot lawfully be re-elected according to the provisions of the Philippine constitution, the newly elected president is aware that he or she is has a limited time in which to implement any policies that might be considered beneficial to the country and that might secure him or her a favorable place in the sentiments of the people and in the annals of history. The Constitutional Clock stopped itself on January 20, 2001. This was the day of the coup d’ état against the reigning president, who had still approximately another three years left on the clock. The clock stopped because of the unconstitutional nature of President Estrada’s removal, and it can only be resumed once legitimacy is restored in the office of the president. There do exist some alternatives as to what could take place in the government of this country at this time. It appears that Cory (Corazon Aquino) and the church might be in favor of replacing Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, in her failing attempt at the presidency, with her vice president Manuel Noli de Castro. This would not be acceptable to the members of the movement that would have Arroyo resign, the Resign-GMA movement. One of the main reasons is that “Noli is perceived to be both part and beneficiary of the cheating machine” (“Takes”). Should Cory and the church back Noli, this would badly taint their reputation from a moral perspective. Another alternative to the now unpopular Arroyo is the establishment of a military government. The repercussions of a military government might not be favorable to these parties, and then the only reasonable alternative would be to reinstate Erap as president. It is evident, though, that numerous divisions inside the groups that would be able to effect the ousting of Arroyo have caused the delay of that event, and consequently the delay of a possible reinstatement of President Estrada. The division exists between those who would seek to right “what they perceive as a historic constitutional wrong represented by the coup that was Edsa II” (“Power”), and those who want to prevent the reinstatement of Estrada, believing that should Arroyo be replaced it should be by Noli. This installation of Noli would be touted as being in accordance with the “rule of law,” but this refers to that same law that was suspended when Erap was denied a fair trial and when he was unjustly removed from the presidency in what amounted to a military coup. Since that law has been suspended, what now governs is somewhat akin to the law of the jungle, and if that be the case then very little prevents the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) from seizing power and reinstalling the rightful president by force. Then, the impeachment trials might be resumed and the law allowed its natural course. It has already been shown that the evidence stands overwhelmingly in favor of the Estrada’s acquittal; therefore, the rightful president would then be able govern. If, however, these interest groups do continue to be divided, the country may be on the verge of civil war, especially if the country sees worsening of its “political anarchy and economic crisis” (“Power”). An alternative to both the governance of Arroyo and reinstallation of Erap would be, as mentioned before, the seizing of power by the military. Military governance has its advantages, and this has been seen throughout the twentieth century in such nations as Indonesia, South Korea, and Taiwan. It is evident that all the other types of governments attempted in the Philippines have brought about little but “poverty, privation, political chaos and hunger” (“Time”), so the consideration of military government for this country is understandable. In fact, military government might be on its way to the Philippines, and this is revealed by the fact that even university presidents are encouraging their officers to “venture into politics and take advantage of the political crisis to catapult themselves into power” (“Time”). However, the military is certainly delaying, and the people are impatient for some kind of action. Sentiments are strongly against Arroyo and many are in favor of Erap’s return. Many who have been long hoping that the Armed Forces would take control of the country’s politics now doubt the capabilities of the military simply because of this delay. If the military does not soon make up its mind to take control, then it must submit to the imminent reinstallation of the former president Estrada in the reversal of what was implemented by Edsa II. It has been seen that it is the wish of the populace is that Estrada be reinstated as president. In fact, “Despite being incarcerated for almost four years, Estrada still maintains the highest popularity ratings in the country” (“Does U.S.”). Gloria Arroyo’s government has placed the country in such a predicament that she stands very unpopular right now. Another coup might be imminent. Such countries as the United States have opinions about this that are very influential in the outcome of the situation. The U.S. Embassy has gone out of its way to report the fact that Estrada indeed is “the most popular national leader in town” (“Does U.S.”). It might be considered that the U.S. Embassy’s objective is to secure the reinstatement of the said leader, should the current one be removed from the office of the president. In light of this new development, the prospects of a military government now seem dim. Reinstatement of Erap was largely the cry of the peace rally at Plaza Miranda, and this began the official move for rectification of the wrong committed during Edsa II. Reasons exist to believe that these rallies will only increase in number and frequency. Principal among these reasons is that GMA’s increasing unpopularity is bound to accelerate even further, as the economic and political conditions worsen. These developments have effectively retarded the prospects of the military to govern. First of all, military government, though plausible and probably practical, would have been no easy matter. The reason is that “a military government would at this time be confronted by a social crisis whose intensity and magnitude are without precedent in this nation’s history and unless those who stage the takeover have a thorough grasp of the essential nature of that crisis, they are bound to be devoured by it” (“Plan”). Therefore, if uncertain about their abilities to handle the rigors involved in governing, the best thing for the military to do would be to step back and allow the reinstatement of Estrada. The public cry for this, plus its endorsement by the US Embassy, has caused any military assertion now to be imprudent as this would risk the dissatisfaction of such a military superpower as the United States. The interest of the United States in the matter has to do with two things. One is the U.S. war on terrorism. The other has to do with U.S. strained relations with China regarding dominance in Asia. The United States has expressed deep concerns that terrorism has begun infiltrating the Philippines. It has gone so far as to describe Mindañao as having the potential to become another Afghanistan, especially since reports suggest that those behind the recent Bali bombing underwent their training in Mindañao. The training presumably took place in “the 40 or so camps which Erap had retrieved from the Moro Islamic Liberation Front but which were returned to the rebel Muslim group by GMA immediately on her assumption to the presidency following Edsa II” (“Why Bush”). With regard to China’s influence in the East, the United States’ interest in retarding that influence is very high. This is especially true of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), as the influence of the United States has long been the dominant one in that region. The Philippines was once a colony of the U.S. and now remains essentially a “neocolony—meaning a state sovereign and independent in theory but in reality and in fact the colony of another” (“Why Bush”). The United States values the Philippines because of its strategic location as the “gateway” of Southeast Asia. Therefore, loss of the Philippines would mean for the United States loss of its influence in and access to Southeast Asia. It must, therefore, keep the nation within its reach because, should this happen, China would have succeeded in winning for itself dominance in the ASEAN region, thereby significantly increasing its authority as a superpower. Because GMA has openly made ties with China, she has secured the disapproval of the United States government. She has signed “a complex of economic and military agreement with China and made sure that the nation’s mining laws were amended to accommodate China’s desire for access to this country’s natural resources” (“Why Bush”). As a result, China has embarked on major investment schemes in the Philippines, and this kind of investment could discount the value of United States’ assistance in the said country. It is clear to see why such a development would be unacceptable to the United States, and why removal of GMA and reinstatement of Erap would appear attractive. Intelligence “leakages” have been attributed to these facts, and are defined by messages to the AFP to replace its allegiance to GMA by support of Estrada. In light of all the turmoil that has been hatched since the removal of President Estrada and his replacement by Gloria Macapagal Arroyo, it is necessary to reiterate some points regarding the performance of Estrada as the head of state and the conditions under which he was removed. His right to rule must be closely examined, as well as the sentiments before, during and after his presidency. This will essentially constitute a re-examination of the conscience on the former president. Estrada was seen as the reincarnation of Ramon Magsaysay, who was the first of the Philippine presidents to be regarded as a “man of the masses” (“Needed”). Estrada was elected by the people and worked for the people, although unlike Magsaysay, his election was not orchestrated by the CIA (“Needed”). His ascendancy to the presidency was a direct result of his popularity with the voting population, and that popularity he won on his own. He was never found to be engaged in any underhand dealings in order to secure his post as president of the nation. The ruler removed by Edsa II was, therefore, a legitimate president, unlike the dictator removed by Edsa I. It must also be noted that his subsequent impeachment process was never completed, “because the pro-impeachment forces simply walked out of the middle of the proceedings” without any objection on the part of the Chief Justice, who knew well that those involved behaved in a contemptible manner before the court. Four years have passed since baseless charges and brute force removed Erap from the seat of the government and cast him into detention. The country has since plunged into turmoil, as his replacement has proved herself incapable of handling the affairs of the country to the best interest of all involved. Her policies have thrown the nation into the middle of the long-waged conflict between China and the United States. In addition, the circumstances that gave rise to her presidency have caused the nation to be so much divided that it is now possibly on the verge of a civil war. President Estrada has been wronged, but what now must be considered is not whether Erap was harmed, but whether the country (which will likely be in existence much longer than Erap shall) was irrevocably hurt by Edsa II. Both the political Left and the Church, who supported the ousting of President Estrada, seem to be re-examining their consciences on this issue. And with good reason, as the repercussions of Edsa II have so far been very distasteful on all fronts. If the voice of the people really is the voice of God (“Needed: Conclusion”), then the overwhelming victory awarded Erap in the Elections of 1998 should be honored, and he should be allowed to re-ascend to his rightful position as leader of the Philippines until such time as another vote of the populace legitimately removes him from office. Works Cited Lichauco, Alejandro. “Does U.S. want Erap Reinstated?” 19 Sept. 2005. ---. “Edsa II, Civil War and Why Erap Should Be Reinstalled.” 3 Oct. 2005. ---. “How does GMA handle a U.S. that Wants Her Out?” 29 Sept. 2005. Read More