Inviting chaos
At the first light of President Rodrigo Duterte's electoral victory in May 2016, international weekly magazine The Economist described the event as a win by a "loudmouth populist" over the "self-selecting oligarchy."
It echoed observations that Duterte's victory, despite his blunt style and stunning policy statements, was largely due to the failure of "the elites in Manila to grasp how much petty corruption and gun violence blight ordinary lives."
"The elite rarely mix with ordinary folk," The Economist wrote, "apart from maids, chauffeurs and deferential farm hands who have worked for generations on the vast haciendas of the landowners." Compare that with "Duterte Harry's unpolished speech and impatience with convention and democratic processes" which was taken by the crowd as "as sign of authenticity and an indication that he will do things differently."
It's just the part of the whole story about Duterte's victory that I happen to agree with, but one section caught my attention which relates to our discussion today. It says: "With so much uncertain, it is not clear what is to be feared more: Mr. Duterte ignoring legal norms and trampling his country's democratic institutions, or the old elite regrouping to frustrate him, inviting political chaos."
In just a year's span Duterte has consolidated his power while maintaining his popularity to the point that obviously the country's old elite is nowhere near capable of frustrating his leadership. Fortunately, the country seems assured that no one could destabilize his administration today and in the immediate future.
Thus, what is disturbing rather is the impatience with democratic institutions that Duterte and his overzealous allies and underlings have no qualms of showing. It is how they have used the campaign against crime and corruption as a reason to conveniently disregard constitutional safeguards -framing the discourse as if government cannot and should not be legally limited in its powers in order to fulfill its promises of thorough and immediate reforms.
A case in point recently is the unwarranted extension of the so-called war on terrorism against critics and perceived enemies of the administration. It started with the petition filed by the Department of Justice before the Manila Regional Trial Court seeking to declare the CPP-NPA as a terrorist organization instead of just an insurgent group.
In a motion filed last month, the DOJ upped the ante by submitting to the court a list of at least 600 persons it wants tagged as terrorists for their alleged ties to communist rebels. The list included United Nations special rapporteur Victoria Tauli-Corpuz.
This prompted Senator Panfilo Lacson, even though a Duterte ally himself, to call "lazy work" the DOJ list. The list shotguns just about everyone with perceived ties to the CPP or those incidentally in similar stance with the group on such issues like the killing of lumads and militarization of mining communities.
Another naked display of this administration's lack of due and prudent regard to the institutions of check and balance is how the country's chief justice is being systematically demolished and her office undermined through what is called "giving of context" -exploiting simmering resentments within the judiciary and eroding the chief justice's credibility in the eyes of the public through overstretched congressional hearings in the guise of discovering probable cause. These are all designed to condition the public's mind to accept CJ Sereno's premature exit, an outcome that is not even necessary for Duterte to succeed as a maverick leader.
Yet as much as I want to see and emphasize the good things going on for our country right now, I am exasperated at the fact that we are still fond of shooting ourselves in the foot.
- Latest
