EDGEDAVAO
VANTAGE POINTS
VOL.5 ISSUE 196 • TUESDAY, DECEMBER 4, 2012
The untold story of the Ampatuans’ fall from political grace ( Conclusion )
I
T was a sickening thought. As president of the then ruling party, Dominguez was then already starting to call the shots in lakas-Kampi and the first thing he did the following day after the November 23 Ampatuan Massacre (many are still referring it as the Maguindanao Massacre) was to call for a meeting of the party executive committee. He set it for November 25, two days after the massacre. Before he could even be sure that he will get a quorum, much more a consensus, Dominguez was already determined to do what is politically and morally expected from him as party president. “Pinatawag ko ang (lakas) execom. Ako na bahala kay Presidente (I called for an executive committee meeting. I will take care of the President),” Dominguez calmed a fidgety Teodoro as they ended their conversation that Wednesday morning. Dominguez had earlier opted to stay in Manila after the Monday Malacañang meeting. He was determined to let the wheels of justice begin to grind. He believed it was the most judicious and most honorable thing to do. The execom meeting, attended by party bigwigs, was tension-filled as some senior leaders are still trying to give the Ampatuans the chance to air their side. He recalled former Justice Secretary Raul Gonzales, a member of the execom of lakas, imploring due process before the Ampatuans are expelled from the party. During the hastily called emergency meeting to expel the Ampatuans, Domin-
S
guez said the discussions on party guidelines and due process were very heated. “One of them was Justice Gonzales who, as a lawyer, insisted on due process,” Dominguez recalled. But he said, “This party (lakas) is presented the opportunity to define itself today to stand for what is right as we have not done so in a long time.” In the end, Dominguez got the decision he wanted from the vote of 7 of 10 execom members present in the meeting. Minutes later, Teodoro arrived and was handed the resolution. While Teodoro was on his way to face the press, Dominguez was also bound for Malacañang to follow up some unrelated business with the President. Before he left Malacañang, he told Arroyo: “By the way Madam President, we just expelled the Ampatuans from the party (lakas-Kampi coalition).” It caught Arroyo by surprise, who, Dominguez recalled, remained speechless up to the moment he left Malacañang. Almost simultaneously, Teodoro tersely announced the expulsion of the Ampatuans from lakas-Kampi. It was swift and daring. Once one of the most favored and powerful political clans, the Ampatuans
became pariahs in politics overnight. They protested and expressed dissatisfaction over Teodoro’s announcement expelling them from the party. But they found little or no sympathy. Even their benefactor, the President, could not do anything against the national outcry and international indignation. The Ampatuans found themselves political orphans. This writer was among the few to whom Dominguez shared the behind the scene events that led to the ouster of the Ampatuans from the party where they were once seen as “the untouchables.” No thanks to their alleged role in the massive electoral frauds that benefited the President herself and many of the lakas-Kampi senators who won in 2007. Dominguez has repeatedly declined to make public his role in the ouster of the Ampatuans from the party from which he also resigned as a member after the 2010 elections. Prior to that, Dominguez also quit as party president in the middle of the 2010 election campaign. He said there will be time for telling what happened during those fateful three days in November where he stood by his own conviction. Now that he will soon leave public office after three consecutive terms, he is reluctantly telling his story, adding that he is not offering a revisionist view of the darkest episode of electoral violence in the country and the most appalling attack against the media in the history of journalism. [Edwin G. Espejo writes for MindaNews and www.asiancorrespondent.com]
gence network reported that private armies were hired mostly by powerful politicians and bigtime businessmen, but also refused to name names for obvious reasons. As a result, intelligence personnel came under fire from members of Congress who felt that because they linked politicians to private armies, all were considered suspects. This prompted them to raise the question: “How come it is fair for them to indict politicians and not fair for them to reveal their identities?” Ever since committee members were not satisfied with the list submitted by the police and military intelligence linkages because there are other armed groups that are notorious but were not mentioned at all in their reports. In most instances, the list would identify the maintainers of private armies only by their surnames or nom de guerre. That’s precisely the reason why members of the previous probe teams complained that the list they saw was quite incomplete. At this stage, though, Congress leadership demanded public disclosure of the names of politicians said to be patrons of dreaded private armies. “People involved must be exposed before the public’s wrath,” they stressed. In the event any member of Congress or any elective officials for that matter are identified to be maintaining armed groups, it is the task of the respective Committee on Ethics to act on the case posthaste. The years witnessed the emergence of politicians who established their political and economic foothold and rein-
forced their power and influence with private armies – from Aparri to Jolo. Private armed groups were organized on the pretext of fighting rebels and criminal elements, but these forces were actually used against their political opponents, and violence had become endemic to the country’s politics. At it seems many hotly contested political territories are still exemplifying political warlords and private armies at its peak. In these political turfs lurked affluent and dominant figures considered as quintessential warlords with more than just a taste for violence. The reduced scale of violence perpetrated by private armies had largely to do with the fear of disqualification. The Commission on Elections (Comelec) had passed long time ago a resolution reiterating that violence, intimidation and terrorism as grounds for disqualification and made prohibition procedures summary. It likewise created the presumption that the act of a follower is the act of a leader for purposes of disqualification. Sad to lament, though, the wary public believes the poll body was perceived to be weak and lacking the will to prosecute a mounting disqualification cases. under the present Aquino administration, a violent-free elections in May 2013 midterm polls are believed unlikely what with private armies and loose firearms still a glaring reality in politics Philippine-style. unless the PNoy leadership and Comelec gather enough strength and political will, the disturbing report on private armies and loose firearms was an “admission of failure” by the police and military establishments because they could not dismantle them outright. And candidates maintaining private armed groups therefore will continue to be emboldened to take the electoral conflicts one step too far.
The existence of private armies
TRONGMEN’S lANGuAGE OF POlITICS IS FORCE – Political violence comes in handy in several provinces of the country where elective positions are hotly contested and where warlords still roam and dominate. Aside from money and party organization, which are usually assumed to be the twin keys in winning an election, some big bosses or strongmen relied on private armies in preparation for their election bid. Their language of politics is force. It came as no surprise that the presence of private armies existed not only during the Marcos era. The same goes true even during the succeeding administrations – Aquino, Ramos, Estrada and Arroyo and now the PNoy leadership. Many influential and wealthy politicians along the years hardly shied away from using force to win the electoral battles and cling on to power like hungry leeches. In a recent report of the Philippine National Police (PNP) and its Peace and Order Council, it reiterated there were at least 150 or more private armies all over the country, composed of about 5,000 men equipped with sophisticated and high-power firearms. With the disturbing report, concerned committees of both Senate and the House should initiate a no non-sense probe into the existence of private armies allegedly being maintained by moneyed and powerful politicians. There were already previous testimonies submitted by the defunct Philippine Constabulary (PC) and later on by the PNP intelligence network to concerned committees in Congress a list containing the names of politicians who maintain armed groups. unfortunately, committee members, as their wont, declined to reveal the names saying the list had already been “sanitized.” Other crucial testimonies likewise alleged the military intelli-
9
Justice delayed, lawyer’s delight How well is justice dispensed in our land? Are the laws applied equally to all? After over one century of political independence, the matter or issue of proper dispensation of justice remains a national problem. There is a strong public perception that we have a double standard of justice in our country --- one for the rich and the powerful and influential, and another for the poor and the powerless. It’s difficult to dispute, or even just downplay, such a perception. It cannot be peremptorily dismissed as a mere figment of the imagination. It’s real. People see, hear and feel it happen. The cold fact is that the high and the mighty in our society routinely trivialize the laws of our land. They can move the wheel of justice according to their own pace. Why, they can even stop it from moving all together – with their money. The turtle-paced trial of the Maguindanao massacre that happened three years ago and shocked the nation, is a shameful proof how hard or even impossible to get justice for the powerless and moneyless. Money, power, influence --- these magnify one’s courage and inflame one’s will to trample the rights of others and defy the laws of men. The rich do not tremble before the law. It is the lawmen who tremble before the rich. The rich are now awed by the majesty of the law. It is the lawmen who bow to the majesty of the bankbook of the rich. Now, it’s not supposed to be that way in a democratic society. We are told time and time again, that everyone is equal before the law. The law is both for the high and the lowly. Well, it’s a mere motherhood statement, a utopian declaration. But the painful and ugly reality is that the “haves” have faster access to the benefits of the law, while the “have-nots” can hardly find relief in the law. The law seems to be gentle to the rich, and harsh to the marginalized. Something is wrong somewhere. Where lies the blame? Whose fault is it? The justice system, or the people who run the system? The system is fundamentally sound, but some of the people who have a direct hand in running the system, are not --mentally and morally. Our justice system is not perfect. But it has worked for generations for more than half a century since it was enshrined in our constitution at the birth of our Commonwealth government in 1935. But here is the drawback. Our legal system has been financially rewarding to the classy-looking law practitioners. The law profession is still one of the most sought-after occupations. Thousands of lawyers are admitted into the bar each year. lawyers can be categorized into two types: those who know the law and uphold the majesty of the law, and those who bow to the majesty of the client’s thick bankbook. Type 2 lawyers are the ones who see the color of money in their profession. The brighter the color, the longer the delay of the trial cases. They have a special talent for seeing loopholes in the law. The ordinary non-legal mind knows it as plain dilatory tactic. The smart lawyer calls it legal maneuvering. Where is justice, you now ask? Well, it is just around the corner. But it’s being ambushed by smart lawyers who are blinded by the loud color of money.