THANKFULLY, the protest rallies of the Iglesia ni Cristo at EDSA have been called off. INC’s leaders have declared that they have reached an “agreement” with the government – without providing any details – while a Malaca ñang spokesman has insisted that “no special concessions” were given for the cessation of the rallies.
That, of course, leaves the public with more questions than answers. We can expect both sides to give a positive spin to their respective versions in order to save face.
Fortunately, the INC leadership was apparently not inclined to provoke a violent confrontation with the government, and the latter obviously had no taste for it either. But it could have escalated into a bloody mess. All it needed was for sinister quarters to explode a bomb in the crowd. Then all hell would have broken loose.
In hindsight, it is easy to say that “effective crowd control” and “police monitoring” would have prevented that from happening – but hindsight is a perfect science. The wise crisis manager prepares for both the best and the worst case scenarios. The memory of the bombing of the Boston Marathon should serve as a stark reminder for the optimists and the naïve.
The question is: While the worst case scenario hovered like a sword of Damocles, what could or should President Benigno S. Aquino III have done to prevent it from falling on our collective heads?
Aquino eventually called a meeting of key officials, and that seem to have resulted in the peaceful resolution of the escalating crisis. Why it took several days and much infernal inconvenience for Metro Manilans before that meeting was convened, and what was finally agreed on to defuse the situation, will remain the subject of speculation.
When presidential spokesman Edwin Lacierda declares that he has no personal knowledge of the agreements, we can be sure that he has been made to swear by the Code of Omerta. As mischievous pundits put it, you can tell what Lacierda knows by the length of his nose.
At any rate, all’s well that ends without bloodshed. We can only hope that the amicable agreement entailed the following: (a) ensuring that the rule of law would prevail, (b) protecting the interests of the public in future protest rallies, (c) cleaning up the garbage and filth at EDSA at the expense of the INC, (c) a fair and just hearing of the grievances and apprehensions of the INC, as well as of those who filed suit against it, (d) a reiteration of support for the duties of the Justice department and (e) a reassurance of a transparent and just resolution of the legal issues. Of course, the “transparency” part may be wishful thinking.
There are those who will insist that Aquino did the right thing by initially “keeping his hands off” the deteriorating situation. In fact, one prominent columnist commented that Aquino’s legendary obstinacy was exactly what was needed because he showed “who’s the boss.”
That kind of macho attitude is only admirable in retrospect – in this case, because the crisis did not spin out of control. But it could have.
In May 1967, a small religious sect called Lapiang Malaya staged a protest march on Taft Avenue in the vicinity of De La Salle University. The confrontation with the Philippine Constabulary turned bloody, claiming 33 dead and 47 wounded.
In January 1987, less than a year after Cory Aquino assumed the presidency, the Kilusang Magbubukid ng Pilipinas, joined by leftist and activist groups, staged a violent rally on Mendiola, virtually at the gates of Malaca ñang. In the skirmish with government authorities, 13 demonstrators were killed and scores were wounded. The media dubbed the incident The Mendiola Massacre.
I think it serves a good purpose to try to understand what triggered the INC protest action, the better to defuse similar situations in the future. One thing is certain, if one were to depend mainly on social media, TV, radio and newspaper reports and commentaries on an issue – any issue – one would end up confused or drawing the wrong conclusions.
At any rate, as far as I can tell, the INC demonstration targeting Justice Secretary Leila de Lima was ignited by the rumor that the Department of Justice was set to arrest the top leaders of the INC for “illegal detention,” based on a complaint of an INC minister. That, in turn, started with a conflict within the INC that also involved possible violations of the law. Thus, part of the problem was truly an “internal” issue. On the other hand, part of it did require the intervention of the justice system.
The “impending arrest” was denied by the DOJ, clarifying that only the court can issue an arrest warrant. But the tendency of Secretary De Lima to bask in the media limelight, as well as the tendency of certain media to sensational vague statements and speculate on their implications, appear to have blown the issue out of proportion.
The problem with our justice system is that it suffers in terms of credibility. Worse yet, there have been too many allegations of “selective justice” being inflicted on political enemies.
Note that, according to the revised penal code, illegal detention beyond 5 days is a non-bailable crime (until the 2006 suspension of the death penalty, it was also punishable by death).
Under the prevailing environment of distrust and perceived unequal application of justice, if you were leaders of the INC and you are threatened with non-bailable confinement, like that imposed on former President Gloria Arroyo, Senators Bong Revilla and Jinggoy Estrada and, until recently, Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, wouldn’t you have reacted in the extreme?
Whether or not that extreme reaction is legal or rational is not the immediate issue that should have been addressed. As the CEO of a company or of a country, when you are confronted by a serious problem involving your people, it doesn’t matter whose fault it is. The first thing you do is contain the problem, control the damage, and find a solution for it. Retribution should follow – but only after the problem has been solved or at least minimized.
This is where Noynoy Aquino, as chief executive, should have immediately acted. One pines for those days when then Defense Secretary Fidel Ramos went out of his way to personally meet with the leaders of an attempted military coup to listen to their grievances and to negotiate a de-escalation of the conflict. In that respect, President Cory Aquino was more fortunate than her son. She had Ramos to decisively take up the cudgels for her.
Some kibitzers will say that reaching out to the INC would have been like giving a special concession to a powerful political sector – but that attitude ignores the fact that, whatever their voting clout and their political inclinations, the members of the INC are citizens of the Philippines. As such, they deserve a respectful hearing from the president of the country.
The situation was most certainly more deserving of personal presidential intervention than the surrender of alleged super scammer Janet Napoles. She was granted a meeting in Malaca ñang with no less than DILG Secretary Mar Roxas escorting her to the palace.
The harsh fact is that a group that can muster thousands for a massive demonstration that threatens to escalate into anarchy should never, never be taken for granted. In fact, one hostage taker with a gun, threatening the lives of a busload of innocent tourists, should never, never be taken for granted.
Aquino should have learned a lesson from the Luneta crisis. On second thought, maybe he did. ([email protected])
