Treading the Avenue known as "Epifanio De los Santos"

Remembering EDSA I
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.
Sounding Board - Philippine Daily Inquirer

February 25 is a day for recalling February 1986 and the times that preceded it. My own thoughts about what transpired have not changed:

“There is a tendency to attribute the rebirth of democracy to the events of the four days of February 1986. Those days will forever be remembered as a shining moment in a people’s history; but the four days do not tell all. EDSA was but a part of a process, albeit the most memorable both for the intensity of its emotion and its dramatically eye-catching and infectious symbolism. But the long process of which it was a part includes both the struggles that precipitated the imposition of martial law as well as the struggles during the long dark nights that followed.

“There was never a moment, starting on Sept. 21, 1972, when the nation was not moving toward EDSA. The underground struggle, the bloody encounters, the groans of torture victims, the pamphleteering, the rallies, both political and religious, the silent storming of heaven by contemplative nuns, the whir of fax machines, the electoral struggle under the most adverse circumstances and, yes, even the ‘collaboration’ with the enemy—each in its own way contributed to the assurance of rebirth. In the end, Divine Providence, which the Filipino people had first formally invoked in its 1935 Constitution, put the pieces together and let them explode into the celebration that was EDSA.

“When I reflect on the events of 20 years ago, I see hubris as divine Providence’s triggering weapon for the final downfall of the ruler. Feeling that he bestrode the world like an unconquerable colossus, President Marcos dared all challengers to a ‘snap election.’ That was November 1985. The events that followed brought out a multiplicity of heroes no one of whom could have achieved the result alone.

“First, presidential hopefuls sacrificed their ambition (realistic or not) in favor of one presidential candidate supported by all. They anointed a housewife inexperienced in governance, derisively branded by the ‘wise’ as walang alam, to become the ‘foolish’ instrument through whom Providence would confound the proud. Her battle cry of tama na, sobra na captured the public imagination.

“Next, in the early weeks of February, whether by free choice or by desperate necessity, new heroes emerged. The computer operators unmasked the conspiracy to cheat the ‘foolish’ woman of her electoral victory. Government intelligence officers discovered a RAM plot for a coup d’etat. Trapped, the soldiers made a defiant stand. To the death, they said.

“Then followed the call of the Cardinal and of Butz Aquino for the populace to rescue the beleaguered soldiers. The people came in massed brigades of all ages and sexes to shield the soldiers from the threatening mortars of the President.

“The mortars were never fired. Fundamental humanity overcame the soldiery. Loyalty to the sovereign people conquered, and the soldiers turned their back on the Commander-in-Chief. In that fact too there was heroism. And the dramatic encounter between civilian and soldiers, bound together by the bonds of love of the same country and of the same people, is what is celebrated as salubong, symbolic of a people determined to join hands and work for a new future.”

Today the lament is sometimes heard that nothing has really changed since 1986. What a waste EDSA I was. That obviously is not true.

The government structure under the 1987 Constitution, though by no means perfect, is better than the government that evolved from the 1973 Constitution. Imperfect as it is as a protest against the Marcos Constitution, in more ways than one it is truly democratic.

Congress today is structurally almost the same as that of the 1935 Constitution even if, in terms of the quality of membership, it suffers by comparison with those of the 1935 Constitution. But at least it is different from the Batasang Pambansa.

As in the 1935 Constitution, the office of President is not free from the temptation toward authoritarianism. Much depends on who holds the power. For the moment, we seem to be safe.

The Supreme Court membership today does not go through the same rigid screening as the members of the Court under the 1935 Constitution. But collectively it is an improvement on the Marcos Constitution.

The emotion and drama of February 1986 have died down and I do not see “people power” like that of EDSA I emerging. Nor do I see hubris precipitating radical reform. Not yet, anyway. What I see is an emerging people power in the form of energized local governments, unfortunately not yet nationwide but hitherto only here and there. But I also see corruption and popular indifference of a people lulled by economic and technological advances as major obstacles to progress. In the end, there is truth to the dictum that a people get the government they deserve. How can everyone be awakened to the realization that the future depends not on government but on all of us?

Beyond the shadow of doubt?

SC acquits Webb, 6 others in Vizconde massacre
By Edu Punay
The Philippine Star

MANILA, Philippines – Hubert Webb and six others convicted for the highly publicized Vizconde massacre almost two decades ago walked off the national penitentiary as free men after the Supreme Court acquitted them based primarily on inconsistent testimonies of state witness Jessica Alfaro during trial.

Voting 7-4, the High Court ruled that the Paranaque regional trial court erred when it handing down in Jan. 2000 the guilty verdict on Webb, Hospicio "Pyke" Fernandez, Antonio "Tony Boy" Lejano, Michael Gatchalian, Peter Estrada, Miguel "Ging" Rodriguez and Gerardo Biong for the crime of rape with homicide.

The High Court overturned the verdict of Paranaque RTC Branch 274 Judge and now CA Justice Amelita Tolentino, which was upheld by the Court of Appeals on Dec. 15, 2005 and had sentenced the primary accused to life imprisonment.

Biong, who was convicted as accessory for destroying evidence, was released last month after serving his sentence of 12 years.

“There is no more motion for reconsideration can be filed. That would be tantamount to double jeopardy,² Court Administrator and SC spokesman Jose Midas Marquez told a press conference, citing a rule in criminal procedures prohibiting a second prosecution against the same person under the same offense after acquittal or conviction by court.

But Marquez stressed that declaring the guilt was not proven beyond reasonable doubt is not tantamount to establishing innocence of the accused.

The 38-page decision penned by Associate Justice Roberto Abad cited "reasonable and lingering doubt on the guilt of the accused" and "failure of prosecution to establish the guilt beyond reasonable doubt."

"In our criminal justice system, what is important is, not whether the court entertains doubts about the innocence of the accused since an open mind is willing to explore all possibilities, but whether it entertains a reasonable, lingering doubt as to his guilt. For, it would be a serious mistake to send an innocent man to jail where such kind of doubt hangs on to one's inner being, like a piece of meat lodged immovable between teeth," the SC stressed. [...]

Click here to read full text.

----------

The final decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on this case as released in the media, basically boils down to and focuses on the credibility of the testimony of the "star witness" versus the alibi of the accused.

Here is a summary of the decision as reported by ABS-CBN:

1.) Quality of witness - Jessica Alfaro was a National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) asset, not really an eye witness. At first, she told the NBI she would bring in a witness to the commission of the crime, but when she couldn't do so, she said she would play the role of eye witness.

2.) Suspicious details in some testimonies;

3.) Quality of testimony (inherent inconsistencies);

4.) Supposed corroborations which are unreliable.

For those interested, you can grasp more understanding of the case's decision by reading a copy of the full text of the decision which may also be found at the following link:

Supreme Court decision on Webb et al re Vizconde Massacre

Now, if we take a look at how the justices voted on the case, the Supreme Court en banc voted: 7-4-4 (7 in favor, 4 dissented, 4 abstained).

The reasons why the four Associate Justices abstained were:

1.) Antonio Carpio (because he testified during the hearings at the Regional Trial Court);

2.) Mariano del Castillo - (because one of the accused is a client of the law firm of his wife);

3.) Presbitero Velasco - (close relation to a party);

4.) Antonio Nachura - (who signed as former Solicitor-General before his appointment to the court).

In other words, not half (but almost very close to half) of the number of justices deemed that there are reasonable shadows of doubt in the credibility of the testimony of the prosecution's star witness.

In the imperfect world full of mistakes and uncertainties, one desperate proverb says: "It is better to wrongfully free a guilty person than to wrongfully punish an innocent man."

Because of the inherent imperfections of the man-made system of justice, democratic governments presume any accused person to be innocent unless proven guilty beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt.

So in my personal opinion, the en banc voting of 7-4-4 is not convincing enough. The final decision of the Supreme Court of the Philippines on this particular case is not very solid, thus perhaps leaving a reasonable shadow of doubt in the minds of many people.

Dense And/Or Malicious?

By Fr. Roy Cimagala
The Bohol Chronicle

For a while I was frozen in disbelief as I read newspaper headlines and commentaries of what the Pope said recently about condoms. Who would not be dismayed when you read titles like, "Church has changed her position on condoms"?

There were more disconcerting takes. UN officials welcomed the Church's change of heart. Palace told bishops should now soften their stand on the RH bill given the Pope's statement on condoms.

Lagman, the main RH bill proponent, and the Damasonians were practically dancing in the streets. Some clerics now lawyering for the bill must be excited.

I could not believe that some officials who are supposed to have some IQ and the media would bother to publish this clear case of misinformation, since the clarification on the part of the Vatican was readily available.

It was again another field day for sensationalism. Virtually a bar room type of atmosphere, complete with the carousing and the drunkenness, with practically the whole international community as the stage.

The Pope's words were twisted. Commentators just selected a part and blew it up according to their own agenda. They were actually expressing their own mind, not the Pope's.

Where have we fallen into? I can't help but think that those responsible for transmitting this piece of misinformation must be dense and/or plainly malicious. Sorry, I don't have many other possibilities.

To make things worse, I wonder if we can expect any note of apology from any of the protagonists. What is most likely is to play the blaming game. And most likely the blame would mainly fall on the Pope for making such statement.

But the Pope did right in clarifying that matter about the condoms. What he was actually saying was that condoms as contraceptives are always wrong, are always sinful.

Yet in spite of that sinfulness, one can still distinguish shades of mitigating circumstances. The "justification" of the use of the condom arises from this-that it can prevent graver harm, that it can be a sign of a beginning conversion, etc.

Just the same, its use as a contraceptive in spite of those mitigating circumstances is already wrong. Obviously, when the condom is used as a balloon for decoration or toy, its use is not anymore sinful. It's now moral.

So the Pope is trying to be nuanced in his approach to a moral situation. Who says the Pope and the Church in general are just dogmatic, so black and white as not to admit shades? I would say, the Pope was trying to take us a step further than our current state of understanding about condom use.

The reasoning behind the Pope's argument echoes the one used by our Lord himself when he talked about the unjust steward, found in Luke 16. Our Lord praised the dishonest steward for his cleverness in arranging things when he, the steward, would eventually be kicked out of his employment.

So, our Lord, even in the midst of an over-all sin, managed to see bright spots in that cleverness.

The parable concluded by saying, "The master commended the dishonest steward for his prudence. For the children of this world are wiser in their generation than the children of light." (Lk 16,8)

As our Lord said, we need to be innocent as doves but also shrewd as serpents. We have to be very prudent and discerning, without allowing that prudence to spoil the goodness of our heart. It's not easy, but it can be done, with God's grace and our efforts.

This quality is necessary these days, when we know that some people and even some leaders in politics, business, etc., can be playing the devil's games. Recently, for example, we were pleasantly surprised to hear former US President Clinton sort of giving a positive comment on our big population.

Without saying that he is playing the devil's game, we are of course happy to hear what he said, though we should not forget what he is known for. He is good in playing games, and so we just have to decipher what game he is playing this time.

If in the end, it's found that he is being honest, then well and good. If not, then we have to act accordingly. We should try to avoid being taken for a ride, being sweet talked to. We are living in dangerous times. We need to be familiar, for example, with the reality behind the expression, "wag the dog."

But prudence should allow us to see the silver lining in the world's dark clouds.

Congratulations to our dear "Pambansang Kamao"

Now I believe what boxing promoter Bob Arum said that Manny Pacquiao is the greatest boxer he had ever seen, greater even than heavy weight boxing legend M. Ali. But what gains most my respect for Manny as a professional boxer in this fight with Margarito is the fact that he has chosen to spare Margarito from possible further severe injuries when he could have easily knock him down at the last rounds. At the eleventh round, he even quickly glanced at the corner of his opponent to look for signs of surrender from Margarito's coach because he was unwilling to hurt Margarito's badly swollen face any more destructively.

For me Manny won even a deeper level of victory that no other fighter could have shown if they were the ones in Manny's position in this fight. At the last round, Manny could have easily gone for the "kill", but he has chosen to end the final round with less powerful punches and saved Margarito further severe injuries to the face.

With such strength and a great team that the Lord has blessed Manny with, who can compare to the glory that Manny has given our homeland? No fighter I've yet seen who is like Manny who is not ashamed to honor the Lord in each of his professional fights.

In one interview I heard Manny said something like, "Tao lang si Margarito, nagkakamali. No one is perfect." By honoring Margarito with a professional bout, even though Margarito lost, Manny was able to restore back Margarito's dignity as a professional boxer after that big mistake Margarito had done that caused him a long time of suspension.

Manny, congratulations! We are so proud of you, our dear "Pambansang Kamao". May you remain humble and may you continue to share the overwhelming blessings that the Lord has blessed you with --materially, physically, and spiritually. Never forget to honor the Lord with some portion of your blessings.