Balangiga bells vs national territory
A day after President Rodrigo Duterte gave his State of the Nation Address, we took up in class the concept of separation of powers. Basically, and we all know this, we mean by this concept that in our system of government, we have three major departments (and some constitutional bodies) each of which is assigned different powers, duties functions and responsibilities. It is written in our constitution that that the president is to address the congress on the first day of the legislature’s regular session. That was what we witnessed last Monday.
The SONA is one occasion when the highest ranking officials of the country converge in one venue to know what the sitting president has done, thus far, in his term and plans to do in the immediate following years of his administration. Last Monday, President Duterte, in observance of separation of powers, legislation being out of his turf, asked the members of the Senate to work on the tax reform bill, among others. That was fine. What was not fine was the way he wanted the Supreme Court to lift a restraining order on a part of the law on reproductive health. To me, the president sounded like dictating upon the highest tribunal in a manner that seemed to disregard the well-entrenched principle of separation of powers.
The thing that probably got the biggest howl during SONA was the following fiery statements: “Give us back the Balangiga bells. They are ours. They belong to the Philippines. They are part of our heritage.” We played like an angry mob when our president stoked our hatred against an American regimen who took from Balangiga the town’s symbol of indomitable quest for freedom. It happened in a SONA attended by the highest diplomatic officer of USA. I felt that the American ambassador was invited to witness the solemn occasion to be publicly insulted! If the American diplomatic felt the inglorious impact of a public censure, credit must go to his poker face for not showing his undeniable discomfort.
Truly, there is something for us Filipinos to be indignant about. The president, in our name and for our sake, must indeed be angry that a part of our heritage was taken away from us by force. It is only just that we demand the return of what is rightfully ours.
Also attending the SONA was the Chinese ambassador. His presence was duly acknowledged and he brimmed when the president mentioned that two bridges will soon span the Pasig river, courtesy of the People’s Republic of China.
But I thought it was good time to remind China to return to the Philippines part of our territory that it seized by force. Some islands dotting the West Philippine Sea have been occupied by Chinese armed forces, despite the fact that an international arbitration tribunal ruled on the dispute in favor of the Philippines. Our president could have spoken to the Chinese ambassador the belligerent way he talked to the American diplomatic in the perceived millions in the international audience. After all, asking that our territorial integrity be respected is more serious matter than the return of a private property like the Balangiga bells.
Finally, I hope we shall clarify which is important to us: pushing to the brink our international ties over the Balangiga bells or keeping silent over violation of our territorial integrity.
- Latest
