So many things had happened in our country for the past two months. The scandal that rocked again our country last September 2007 (NBN-ZTE deal) had been revived because of the emergence of a new "star witness" in the name of Jun Lozada, a consultant, friend and "team mate" of half-whistle blower, Sec. Romulo Neri of the NEDA. Things happened so fast that before we know it, our country is again in the middle of a crisis. Everyone is again being challenged to be involved one way or the other.
It is a temptation to make hasty decisions on these things that are happening before us. We can not deny that what we had seen, heard, and felt would prod us to make statements and positions and consequently make corresponding actions. In fact, many had done so. All of these contributed to the situation that we now have today. Just what is the situation that we now have today?
First, again, our government is under fire from certain sectors of our citizenry to clarify the alleged corruptions happening particularly the "deals" that our government are making. The presidency had been dragged into the matter because, again, it is suspected of being party to these "shady and anomalous deals". Many are of the opinion that if anomalies seem to be happening it should be the government, led by the president and the Ombudsman, who should be putting light to these. What is interesting is that our president and her cabinet seem to be disregarding if not obstructing the truth behind all of these accusations.
Second, again, those who are against the president are combining forces and making use of this issue in order to remove her from office. The left, civil society, opposition, business community, farmers, laborers, poor, some Church groups, some military personnel and others had found a common ground and had seen a common vision to act together against a common enemy. They had set aside temporarily their agenda in order to organize and be united to proceed and succeed in achieving the common goal of ousting the president.
Third, again, the senate is at the forefront of the investigation of these matters. The senate had been active in accommodating these issues because of their mandate to make laws that will help prevent crimes and/or penalize criminals. This is even to the point of grandstanding in aid of election (to political positions including the presidency). Barring deliberate use of the hearings as opportunities for exposure and positive points, the same can not be helped. However, that is not the only point. Those who are accusing the senate of not really holding the hearings in aid of legislation and therefore should stop doing it are either missing or consciously neglecting the fact that the senate also has oversight functions. The senate has the responsibility, as provided for by the constitution, to see to it that government is doing its job. Such is the framework of our government system and should not be disregarded. (By the way, where is the House of Representatives in this?)
Fourth, again, "people power" (a la EDSA 1 and EDSA 2) is being advocated in order to achieve the purpose of ousting the president and/or forcing the government to respond to the clamor of the people for truth. Time and again, "people power", though two had been successful, had been questioned as to what it really is and what are the conditions in which it should be applied. Our constitution provided it. Its context was EDSA 1. Learning from the past, it was recognized as an option by the people against an abusive government. It is interesting that there are people now who regard it as passe, dead, waned, unconstitutional, ineffective, etc. The more painful thing is that some of those who were there in both successful "people power" were the same people who are claiming the same. (Shade of the entry of the Lord Jesus to Jerusalem in the Palm Sunday liturgy?). It is clear that vested interests matter most.
Fifth, again, the Catholic Church, is involved and being regarded as a very significant actor in this whole issue. There is no problem really when the matter is about faith and morals. In whatever situation and circumstance, whenever necessary, and wherever it happens, the Church will always dispense her responsibility of guiding her flock. Again, the leadership of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, the bishops and the archbishops, met, prayed, discerned, discussed, argued, and responded. Two pastoral letters came out only to address the situation and guide the faithful on how to respond to challenges at hand. Whereas in EDSA 1 and EDSA 2, the Church was stepping on thin ice and bordering on being political, this time, she chose to remain apolitical but vigilant. The CBCP decided, though not unanimously, not to ask for the resignation of the president, but opted for strongly challenging her government to make the necessary actions to facilitate the revelation of the truth regarding the issues. Further, the CBCP believed that change in everyone is the better course to take. We may be able to change leaders, but if we do not have changed leaders, we will be back to where we were before, maybe even worse.
There is really nothing wrong with similar things coming up again. Learning from the experience of the past, we can confidently face again "again". If we will commit the same mistakes we committed before, then "again" had overcome us. If we will correct our previous mistakes and respond well, then "again" will really be a gain. The word itself should lead us to the idea that we should have nothing to lose with it. The least we could have in "again" is a gain. Come again???
It is a temptation to make hasty decisions on these things that are happening before us. We can not deny that what we had seen, heard, and felt would prod us to make statements and positions and consequently make corresponding actions. In fact, many had done so. All of these contributed to the situation that we now have today. Just what is the situation that we now have today?
First, again, our government is under fire from certain sectors of our citizenry to clarify the alleged corruptions happening particularly the "deals" that our government are making. The presidency had been dragged into the matter because, again, it is suspected of being party to these "shady and anomalous deals". Many are of the opinion that if anomalies seem to be happening it should be the government, led by the president and the Ombudsman, who should be putting light to these. What is interesting is that our president and her cabinet seem to be disregarding if not obstructing the truth behind all of these accusations.
Second, again, those who are against the president are combining forces and making use of this issue in order to remove her from office. The left, civil society, opposition, business community, farmers, laborers, poor, some Church groups, some military personnel and others had found a common ground and had seen a common vision to act together against a common enemy. They had set aside temporarily their agenda in order to organize and be united to proceed and succeed in achieving the common goal of ousting the president.
Third, again, the senate is at the forefront of the investigation of these matters. The senate had been active in accommodating these issues because of their mandate to make laws that will help prevent crimes and/or penalize criminals. This is even to the point of grandstanding in aid of election (to political positions including the presidency). Barring deliberate use of the hearings as opportunities for exposure and positive points, the same can not be helped. However, that is not the only point. Those who are accusing the senate of not really holding the hearings in aid of legislation and therefore should stop doing it are either missing or consciously neglecting the fact that the senate also has oversight functions. The senate has the responsibility, as provided for by the constitution, to see to it that government is doing its job. Such is the framework of our government system and should not be disregarded. (By the way, where is the House of Representatives in this?)
Fourth, again, "people power" (a la EDSA 1 and EDSA 2) is being advocated in order to achieve the purpose of ousting the president and/or forcing the government to respond to the clamor of the people for truth. Time and again, "people power", though two had been successful, had been questioned as to what it really is and what are the conditions in which it should be applied. Our constitution provided it. Its context was EDSA 1. Learning from the past, it was recognized as an option by the people against an abusive government. It is interesting that there are people now who regard it as passe, dead, waned, unconstitutional, ineffective, etc. The more painful thing is that some of those who were there in both successful "people power" were the same people who are claiming the same. (Shade of the entry of the Lord Jesus to Jerusalem in the Palm Sunday liturgy?). It is clear that vested interests matter most.
Fifth, again, the Catholic Church, is involved and being regarded as a very significant actor in this whole issue. There is no problem really when the matter is about faith and morals. In whatever situation and circumstance, whenever necessary, and wherever it happens, the Church will always dispense her responsibility of guiding her flock. Again, the leadership of the Catholic Church in the Philippines, the bishops and the archbishops, met, prayed, discerned, discussed, argued, and responded. Two pastoral letters came out only to address the situation and guide the faithful on how to respond to challenges at hand. Whereas in EDSA 1 and EDSA 2, the Church was stepping on thin ice and bordering on being political, this time, she chose to remain apolitical but vigilant. The CBCP decided, though not unanimously, not to ask for the resignation of the president, but opted for strongly challenging her government to make the necessary actions to facilitate the revelation of the truth regarding the issues. Further, the CBCP believed that change in everyone is the better course to take. We may be able to change leaders, but if we do not have changed leaders, we will be back to where we were before, maybe even worse.
There is really nothing wrong with similar things coming up again. Learning from the experience of the past, we can confidently face again "again". If we will commit the same mistakes we committed before, then "again" had overcome us. If we will correct our previous mistakes and respond well, then "again" will really be a gain. The word itself should lead us to the idea that we should have nothing to lose with it. The least we could have in "again" is a gain. Come again???
No comments:
Post a Comment