CPP calls on people to overthrow Arroyo dictatorship
February 26, 2006
The Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP-CC) today condemned Gloria Arroyo for having "established a new fascist dictatorship" by issuing Presidential Proclamation 1017 declaring a "state of national emergency."
"Arroyo has arrogated martial law powers," the CPP-CC said. In fact, it pointed out, Arroyo has "long desired to officially declare some form of martial law" but has consistently been thwarted by widespread protests.
Through Presidential 1017, the Arroyo regime has "furthered its repressive and fascist acts, including plans to arrest leaders and activists of democratic and progressive organizations and parties, and government, military and police officers and personnel critical of the Arroyo regime."
"Like Marcos, Arroyo has resorted to concocting outright lies" to justify the imposition of fascist policies. The CPP-CC condemned the Arroyo regime for fabricating a so-called plot involving the participation of New People's Army (NPA) guerrillas in protest rallies as pretext for the declaration of a state of national emerency.
The CPP said that the NPA "continues to abide by the policy of non- intervention in mass protest demonstrations in Metro Manila and other urban areas."
The CPP-CC has directed the NPA "to launch tactical offensives that can be won against diehard pro-Arroyo and fascist units of the reactionary armed forces and, whenever the opportunity presents itself, coordinate with the anti-Arroyo and other friendly units within the AFP and PNP."
It further called "on the democratic forces and the broad masses to heighten the antifascist aspect of the struggle against the Arroyo regime."
The CPP-CC also urged military and police elements "to defy fascist orders from their generals to suppress the people's civil liberties," even as it called on "positive elements within the government's military and police to join and support democratic forces who persist in building the requisites for a new people power uprising."
The CPP-CC said that "Arroyo has only succeeded in steeling the people's determination to further build up mass protests towards another people power uprising, furthered unrest within the military and police forces and broadened the ranks of those determined to withdraw their support to the Arroyo regime."
"The Filipino people will not be coerced into submission," said the CPP-CC. "They are determined to continue resisting the Arroyo regime's fascist acts. They demand the end of the Arroyo regime and its replacement by a government that truly advances national freedom and democracy."
Monday, February 27, 2006
Dictator
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=67681
Dictator
First posted 04:36am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer
A GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT itself from a threat. But a government has no right to tyrannize the world to protect itself from that threat. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) is not doing the first, she is doing the second. Her response to an attempt to unseat her by force is to become a dictator.
Since she discovered a plot against her by a group of military mutineers, she has variously: proclaimed a state of emergency incorporating martial-law powers; arrested Randy David and 30 individuals for taking to the streets to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Edsa; practically took over the Tribune; arrested Crispin Beltran and nearly did so Satur Ocampo, and attempted to intimidate media. Calibrated? This is about as calibrated a response to the provocation as burning a house down to get rid of termites.
The strangest things have happened to this country but none stranger than that the very day dedicated to the fall of martial law should be dedicated to its resurrection 20 years later; the very day dedicated to reclaiming the freedoms guaranteed by democracy should be dedicated to losing it to a tyranny guaranteed by trapos and generals. Our editorial said it was a betrayal of Edsa. It is, and breathtakingly so.
The only continuing threat to the Republic is not an ongoing mutiny, it is an ongoing rule shrouded in illegitimacy. I was listening to CNN last Friday and their correspondent was saying the widespread perception here was that GMA had rigged the elections with the help of a Comelec commissioner. The host asked if emergency rule was not going to deepen the perception she could rule only by force. The correspondent said yes, it would. I agree one thousand percent. It would, and it does. Since last Friday, GMA has shown she can now rule only by force.
The only solution to rebellions and uprisings, real or imagined, is not for GMA to crush the freedoms of this country so that she may survive. The only solution to rebellions and uprisings, real or imagined, is for GMA to step down so that this country may breathe. Take it from Cory who defied her order for all rallies to cease on the day given to celebrating the reclamation of freedom and who asked her with customary politeness to make the ultimate sacrifice of resigning. Which sounded not unlike asking her husband to make the ultimate sacrifice of living within his means, but that is another story.
I myself have been asking for GMA to be ousted, and will continue to do so. But by constitutional means, not by unconstitutional ones: By People Power and not by a coup. If People Power is unconstitutional, then GMA has no right to exist, her right to govern would have been voided from the start. For even stranger than GMA restoring martial law on the day it was dismantled 20 years ago is GMA declaring illegal the very thing that brought her to power-against the one president in this country whose electoral mandate was ironclad. I remember again my arduously defending the legitimacy of Edsa II against my foreign journalist friends who thought it was a mere coup wrought by the elite against a populist leader. I continue to maintain it was genuine People Power for reasons I will not go into here. But if it was debatable then, it is not debatable now. An act of People Power against an arguably illegitimate president is unarguably legitimate.
Proclamation 1017-it is one of God's mysterious ways that that should sound like Marcos' Proclamation 1081 plunging the country into the darkness of martial law-is a martial law decree, not an emergency act. It posits among its "whereas-es" that media have been aiding an insidious conspiracy which has got to stop. The premise is wrong to begin with: it is not a conspiracy, it is an open and popular demand. Few people in this country bother to hide or disguise their disgust over the Arroyo administration and their fervent desire to see it go. Even the aborted coup-which the AFP chief of staff himself refuses to call so; he calls it a "threatened withdrawal of support"-was so openly advertised, with a view to convincing the higher-ups in the military chain of command to go along with it. Where in the world will you find a coup like that?
But more than that, that "whereas" is vicious, aimed not at stopping uprisings but dissent, not at stopping power-grabs but protest, not at stopping coups but criticism. Henceforth, all dissent, protest and criticism against GMA become an aid to a conspiracy. That is the justification for the crackdown that has already begun. The takeover of the Tribune is a brazen trampling of press freedom. That and the arrest of Beltran and the manhunt for Ocampo show the tactics of the nascent dictatorship, which is to begin with the "fringe" groups first and go for the mainstream. Tribune is associated with Erap, and Beltran and Ocampo have been painted red. First, the weak links, then the strong ones. They get away with this, they will go for the rest of media.
This is no time to be cowed, this is a time to fight back. As Bertolt Brecht said, you do not protest when the Nazis come to take your neighbors because they are Jews and communists, they will come to take you one day. I recall as well while writing "Dead Aim," a book on how Marcos declared martial law, something Blas Ople told me in an interview. Marcos, he said, never really thought of martial law as lasting as long as it did and becoming as vicious as it did. He declared it to buy time to explore various options. But he was surprised when it met with no resistance. So "tinuloy-tuloy na," he went at it full blast.
You do not stop dictatorship now, it will go full blast. They've pretty much stolen everything, must they steal your freedom too?
Protest. Defy. Fight back.
Dictator
First posted 04:36am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer
A GOVERNMENT HAS THE RIGHT TO PROTECT itself from a threat. But a government has no right to tyrannize the world to protect itself from that threat. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) is not doing the first, she is doing the second. Her response to an attempt to unseat her by force is to become a dictator.
Since she discovered a plot against her by a group of military mutineers, she has variously: proclaimed a state of emergency incorporating martial-law powers; arrested Randy David and 30 individuals for taking to the streets to celebrate the 20th anniversary of Edsa; practically took over the Tribune; arrested Crispin Beltran and nearly did so Satur Ocampo, and attempted to intimidate media. Calibrated? This is about as calibrated a response to the provocation as burning a house down to get rid of termites.
The strangest things have happened to this country but none stranger than that the very day dedicated to the fall of martial law should be dedicated to its resurrection 20 years later; the very day dedicated to reclaiming the freedoms guaranteed by democracy should be dedicated to losing it to a tyranny guaranteed by trapos and generals. Our editorial said it was a betrayal of Edsa. It is, and breathtakingly so.
The only continuing threat to the Republic is not an ongoing mutiny, it is an ongoing rule shrouded in illegitimacy. I was listening to CNN last Friday and their correspondent was saying the widespread perception here was that GMA had rigged the elections with the help of a Comelec commissioner. The host asked if emergency rule was not going to deepen the perception she could rule only by force. The correspondent said yes, it would. I agree one thousand percent. It would, and it does. Since last Friday, GMA has shown she can now rule only by force.
The only solution to rebellions and uprisings, real or imagined, is not for GMA to crush the freedoms of this country so that she may survive. The only solution to rebellions and uprisings, real or imagined, is for GMA to step down so that this country may breathe. Take it from Cory who defied her order for all rallies to cease on the day given to celebrating the reclamation of freedom and who asked her with customary politeness to make the ultimate sacrifice of resigning. Which sounded not unlike asking her husband to make the ultimate sacrifice of living within his means, but that is another story.
I myself have been asking for GMA to be ousted, and will continue to do so. But by constitutional means, not by unconstitutional ones: By People Power and not by a coup. If People Power is unconstitutional, then GMA has no right to exist, her right to govern would have been voided from the start. For even stranger than GMA restoring martial law on the day it was dismantled 20 years ago is GMA declaring illegal the very thing that brought her to power-against the one president in this country whose electoral mandate was ironclad. I remember again my arduously defending the legitimacy of Edsa II against my foreign journalist friends who thought it was a mere coup wrought by the elite against a populist leader. I continue to maintain it was genuine People Power for reasons I will not go into here. But if it was debatable then, it is not debatable now. An act of People Power against an arguably illegitimate president is unarguably legitimate.
Proclamation 1017-it is one of God's mysterious ways that that should sound like Marcos' Proclamation 1081 plunging the country into the darkness of martial law-is a martial law decree, not an emergency act. It posits among its "whereas-es" that media have been aiding an insidious conspiracy which has got to stop. The premise is wrong to begin with: it is not a conspiracy, it is an open and popular demand. Few people in this country bother to hide or disguise their disgust over the Arroyo administration and their fervent desire to see it go. Even the aborted coup-which the AFP chief of staff himself refuses to call so; he calls it a "threatened withdrawal of support"-was so openly advertised, with a view to convincing the higher-ups in the military chain of command to go along with it. Where in the world will you find a coup like that?
But more than that, that "whereas" is vicious, aimed not at stopping uprisings but dissent, not at stopping power-grabs but protest, not at stopping coups but criticism. Henceforth, all dissent, protest and criticism against GMA become an aid to a conspiracy. That is the justification for the crackdown that has already begun. The takeover of the Tribune is a brazen trampling of press freedom. That and the arrest of Beltran and the manhunt for Ocampo show the tactics of the nascent dictatorship, which is to begin with the "fringe" groups first and go for the mainstream. Tribune is associated with Erap, and Beltran and Ocampo have been painted red. First, the weak links, then the strong ones. They get away with this, they will go for the rest of media.
This is no time to be cowed, this is a time to fight back. As Bertolt Brecht said, you do not protest when the Nazis come to take your neighbors because they are Jews and communists, they will come to take you one day. I recall as well while writing "Dead Aim," a book on how Marcos declared martial law, something Blas Ople told me in an interview. Marcos, he said, never really thought of martial law as lasting as long as it did and becoming as vicious as it did. He declared it to buy time to explore various options. But he was surprised when it met with no resistance. So "tinuloy-tuloy na," he went at it full blast.
You do not stop dictatorship now, it will go full blast. They've pretty much stolen everything, must they steal your freedom too?
Protest. Defy. Fight back.
Three emergency situations
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=67686
Three emergency situations
First posted 04:56am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.
Inquirer
IN 2002 NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER ROILO Golez set alarm bells ringing when he came out of a Malacañang conference, announcing that President Macapagal-Arroyo was ready to declare a state of emergency in General Santos. The announcement conjured up visions of arbitrary arrests and indefinite detention. Then, as now, we had not yet recovered from the martial law trauma. Hence the alarm bells had to be doused immediately. Golez himself clarified that a state of emergency is a "generic term" which enables the government to choose from a menu of options.
Last Friday, when Malacañang first hinted at a possible declaration of a national state of emergency, alarm bells erupted. It again conjured up visions of arbitrary arrests and indefinite detention. And a glib Malacañang spokesperson did not help to assuage fears. Neither did the excessive zeal of some minions of the law. The excessive zeal only continues to threaten public safety.
What is a state of emergency all about and what additional powers, if any, does it give the executive arm?
There are in the Constitution three situations in which government is called upon to deal with emergency; but in none of the texts is emergency defined. In fact, in the most severe of these situations, dealt with by Article VII, Section 18, the word emergency is not even mentioned. It is simply described.
Article VII, Section 18 speaks of "lawless violence, invasion or rebellion" which challenge "public safety." These are situations which threaten law and order and national security. They are situations which call for immediate action. Clearly they are emergency situations. And it is the President who is authorized to make the initial assessment whether these situations exist. Moreover, having verified their existence, she is authorized by the Constitution to deal with them through a platter of graduated powers.
The most important is the power to impose martial law which broadens the police power of the President. Less in severity is the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus which authorizes the executive to limit physical liberty. The mildest is the power to call on the Armed Forces to come to the aid of the police in the prevention or suppression of lawless violence or rebellion. It is this last which President Arroyo used when she issued Proclamation 1017. And to all appearances, her minions are reading it as a declaration of war.
Does calling on the Armed Forces give the President additional executive powers? In substance, no; but it does give her more vigor in the enforcement of law and order which is her daily duty anyway. In the exercise of her law enforcement power, she can make use of all the legal instruments available for law enforcement and within the limits prescribed by the Constitution. Calling on the Armed Forces does not authorize her to cross constitutional demarcation lines. But the danger of abuse is significantly enhanced. Now the iron fist is more and more showing behind the mask.
Another provision on emergency is Article VI, Section 23(2) which says: "In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy."
Here, war is certainly considered a national emergency situation but it is not the only emergency situation envisioned. The provision also covers emergency situations mentioned by Article VII, Section 18 as well as situations created by epidemics, typhoons, earthquakes or other natural calamities. But Congress must first agree that a national emergency exists, and the extent and the duration of the powers conferred on the President are determined by Congress.
The third emergency situation is found in Article XII, Section 17 which says: "In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest."
In trying to understand this provision, which among other things leaves "national emergency" undefined, it is important to recall its provenance. It was born during the martial law regime. You don't find a similar provision in the 1935 Constitution. Moreover, the only time it was used was during martial law. In fact, this provision got into the 1973 Constitution, inspired by Marcos' Letter of Instruction (LOI) No. 2, dated 22 September 1972. This LOI instructed the Secretary of National Defense to take over "the management, control and operation of the Manila Electric Company, the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, the National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority, the Philippine National Railways, the Philippine Air Lines, Air Manila (and) Filipinas Orient Airways ... for the successful prosecution by the Government of its effort to contain, solve and end the present national emergency." It was done in the exercise of martial law powers and it was among the executive acts which the Constitutional Convention wanted ratified through Section 3(2), Article XVII of the 1973 Constitution.
In my view, therefore, Article XII, Section 17 embodies a martial law power of the President. It is noteworthy, however, that in referring to Article XII, Section 17, Ms Arroyo, in 1017, simply used it as a springboard for declaring a national state of emergency; she did not attempt to exercise the power embodied in the provision. In fact, she omitted citing the power that the provision embodies. But it is a veiled threat which PNP chief Arturo Lomibao has unveiled.
Three emergency situations
First posted 04:56am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Fr. Joaquin G. Bernas, S.J.
Inquirer
IN 2002 NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER ROILO Golez set alarm bells ringing when he came out of a Malacañang conference, announcing that President Macapagal-Arroyo was ready to declare a state of emergency in General Santos. The announcement conjured up visions of arbitrary arrests and indefinite detention. Then, as now, we had not yet recovered from the martial law trauma. Hence the alarm bells had to be doused immediately. Golez himself clarified that a state of emergency is a "generic term" which enables the government to choose from a menu of options.
Last Friday, when Malacañang first hinted at a possible declaration of a national state of emergency, alarm bells erupted. It again conjured up visions of arbitrary arrests and indefinite detention. And a glib Malacañang spokesperson did not help to assuage fears. Neither did the excessive zeal of some minions of the law. The excessive zeal only continues to threaten public safety.
What is a state of emergency all about and what additional powers, if any, does it give the executive arm?
There are in the Constitution three situations in which government is called upon to deal with emergency; but in none of the texts is emergency defined. In fact, in the most severe of these situations, dealt with by Article VII, Section 18, the word emergency is not even mentioned. It is simply described.
Article VII, Section 18 speaks of "lawless violence, invasion or rebellion" which challenge "public safety." These are situations which threaten law and order and national security. They are situations which call for immediate action. Clearly they are emergency situations. And it is the President who is authorized to make the initial assessment whether these situations exist. Moreover, having verified their existence, she is authorized by the Constitution to deal with them through a platter of graduated powers.
The most important is the power to impose martial law which broadens the police power of the President. Less in severity is the power to suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus which authorizes the executive to limit physical liberty. The mildest is the power to call on the Armed Forces to come to the aid of the police in the prevention or suppression of lawless violence or rebellion. It is this last which President Arroyo used when she issued Proclamation 1017. And to all appearances, her minions are reading it as a declaration of war.
Does calling on the Armed Forces give the President additional executive powers? In substance, no; but it does give her more vigor in the enforcement of law and order which is her daily duty anyway. In the exercise of her law enforcement power, she can make use of all the legal instruments available for law enforcement and within the limits prescribed by the Constitution. Calling on the Armed Forces does not authorize her to cross constitutional demarcation lines. But the danger of abuse is significantly enhanced. Now the iron fist is more and more showing behind the mask.
Another provision on emergency is Article VI, Section 23(2) which says: "In times of war or other national emergency, the Congress may, by law, authorize the President, for a limited period and subject to such restrictions as it may prescribe, to exercise powers necessary and proper to carry out a declared national policy."
Here, war is certainly considered a national emergency situation but it is not the only emergency situation envisioned. The provision also covers emergency situations mentioned by Article VII, Section 18 as well as situations created by epidemics, typhoons, earthquakes or other natural calamities. But Congress must first agree that a national emergency exists, and the extent and the duration of the powers conferred on the President are determined by Congress.
The third emergency situation is found in Article XII, Section 17 which says: "In times of national emergency, when the public interest so requires, the State may, during the emergency and under reasonable terms prescribed by it, temporarily take over or direct the operation of any privately owned public utility or business affected with public interest."
In trying to understand this provision, which among other things leaves "national emergency" undefined, it is important to recall its provenance. It was born during the martial law regime. You don't find a similar provision in the 1935 Constitution. Moreover, the only time it was used was during martial law. In fact, this provision got into the 1973 Constitution, inspired by Marcos' Letter of Instruction (LOI) No. 2, dated 22 September 1972. This LOI instructed the Secretary of National Defense to take over "the management, control and operation of the Manila Electric Company, the Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company, the National Waterworks and Sewerage Authority, the Philippine National Railways, the Philippine Air Lines, Air Manila (and) Filipinas Orient Airways ... for the successful prosecution by the Government of its effort to contain, solve and end the present national emergency." It was done in the exercise of martial law powers and it was among the executive acts which the Constitutional Convention wanted ratified through Section 3(2), Article XVII of the 1973 Constitution.
In my view, therefore, Article XII, Section 17 embodies a martial law power of the President. It is noteworthy, however, that in referring to Article XII, Section 17, Ms Arroyo, in 1017, simply used it as a springboard for declaring a national state of emergency; she did not attempt to exercise the power embodied in the provision. In fact, she omitted citing the power that the provision embodies. But it is a veiled threat which PNP chief Arturo Lomibao has unveiled.
A lapdog republic
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=67682
A lapdog republic
First posted 04:40am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Inquirer
THERE IS THIS POINT OF VIEW THAT A PRESIDENTIAL proclamation serves to publicize the state of mind of the chief executive. President Macapagal-Arroyo's Proclamation 1017 suggests a Marcosian state of mind. Lawyers have pointed out that the closing paragraph of the proclamation was lifted virtually verbatim from one of the most notorious proclamations in presidential and Philippine history: Proclamation 1081 of Sept. 21, 1972. Now, if there is something journalists have in common with lawyers, it's an interest in precision when it comes to language: words, phrases, even punctuation, are not used carelessly (if one takes any pride at all in one's work); and the use of sources reveals, clearly and beyond a shadow of a doubt, the political color of a writer. If you are a Marxist, you quote Marx, Engels, possibly Lenin and Mao; if you are a democrat, you quote Jefferson, Adams, Burke and Rousseau; if you are for non-violence, you quote Gandhi and the Dalai Lama; if you are a fascist, you look to Mussolini, Hitler and Marcos.
No democratically inclined president, and no lawyer working for a president insistent about maintaining democracy by the ways of democracy (to adapt a phrase from Cory Aquino) would even contemplate using the word "decree" in an executive issuance with democratic and republican intentions. And yet this is what Ms Arroyo did.
Proclaimed she: "[I]n my capacity as their Commander in Chief, do hereby command the Armed Forces of the Philippines, to maintain law and order throughout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence as well [as] any act of insurrection or rebellion and to enforce obedience to all the laws and to all decrees, orders and regulations promulgated by me personally or upon my direction." Which might be fine and dandy except no president since Marcos has claimed the right to issue decrees; not even Cory Aquino, during the period of absolute power she enjoyed until the ratification of the present Constitution, was bold, careless, or crass enough to use that word. And yet, Ms Arroyo does: because her lawyers copied the language from Marcos, and the President, who presumably closely reads everything she signs, found nothing offensive with the presumption she can issue decrees, even in a democratic setting.
If you, the reader, are inclined to quibble with me about one word in a document, bear in mind that for writers, lawyers and readers-that is, for everyone who is literate-words are everything. Be that as it may, here's an additional point.
The President's personal lawyer, Romulo Macalintal, has been parroting a phrase to defend the President's proclamation (regardless of the origin of part of its contents): "Presumption of regularity." This is, indeed, something that accompanies all issuances coming from government authorities. It is also the weakest of rhetorical appeals-an appeal to authority.
When the government uses a warrant issued by the dictatorship to arrest an elected member of the House, 21 years after the warrant was issued; when a professor and students, who dare to exercise their democratic rights, and insist on doing it peacefully such that they take the trouble to dialogue with the police, are assaulted, rounded up, detained and questioned-only to be released without charges; when a newspaper is raided and its issue for the day prevented from rolling off the press; and then the government appoints military minders to watch over it while the presidential chief of staff claims, without batting an eyelash, that this does not constitute editorial interference; when the justice secretary and the head of the national police make pointed remarks that they can arbitrarily decide which media can continue to function (implying all media operates on their sufferance); when it is announced that a widow wanting to lay a wreath at the foot of the monument of her husband, and those who wish to recall their efforts to overthrow a dictatorship, all face the possibility of arrest or at least "dispersal"; there can be no presumption of regularity. There can only be a presumption of irregularity.
Fear, selectively applied, is the dusk announcing the more promiscuous enforcement of terror in the dark night that's falling. Intimidation is required if selective official amnesia is to prevail.
Consider that Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim is said to have attempted to convince the AFP chief of staff to join him in withdrawing support from the President. The armed forces has said, in no uncertain terms, that in its determination of the facts, General Lim wanted to join ralliers and make his position known. As far as the chronology goes, this means a mutiny was contemplated by disgruntled military elements, and not a coup d'etat. Withdrawal of support was what the President and her husband actively courted the leadership of the armed forces to undertake Edsa II; and while it is said that history is written by the victors, it must also be seen that she herself once encouraged what she now condemns.
But then, we are dealing with a government whose chief of police proudly proclaimed last Friday: "We have liberated Edsa." From whom, you might ask? Why, from the people. It is a proud boast that Ferdinand Marcos once so badly wanted to make.
The Palace proclaimed a strange kind of victory: the kind that requires a continuing state of siege. It trumpeted the triumph of order and democracy-at the expense of liberty. It has substituted CPR, EO 464 and Proclamation 1017, for liberty, equality and fraternity. We are left with the bow-wow-wow, the yip-yip-yip, of a lapdog republic, in which Palace pets are all vying to paw and sniff at the Palace food and water bowl: and snarling at anyone questioning their position in the pack.
A lapdog republic
First posted 04:40am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Manuel L. Quezon III
Inquirer
THERE IS THIS POINT OF VIEW THAT A PRESIDENTIAL proclamation serves to publicize the state of mind of the chief executive. President Macapagal-Arroyo's Proclamation 1017 suggests a Marcosian state of mind. Lawyers have pointed out that the closing paragraph of the proclamation was lifted virtually verbatim from one of the most notorious proclamations in presidential and Philippine history: Proclamation 1081 of Sept. 21, 1972. Now, if there is something journalists have in common with lawyers, it's an interest in precision when it comes to language: words, phrases, even punctuation, are not used carelessly (if one takes any pride at all in one's work); and the use of sources reveals, clearly and beyond a shadow of a doubt, the political color of a writer. If you are a Marxist, you quote Marx, Engels, possibly Lenin and Mao; if you are a democrat, you quote Jefferson, Adams, Burke and Rousseau; if you are for non-violence, you quote Gandhi and the Dalai Lama; if you are a fascist, you look to Mussolini, Hitler and Marcos.
No democratically inclined president, and no lawyer working for a president insistent about maintaining democracy by the ways of democracy (to adapt a phrase from Cory Aquino) would even contemplate using the word "decree" in an executive issuance with democratic and republican intentions. And yet this is what Ms Arroyo did.
Proclaimed she: "[I]n my capacity as their Commander in Chief, do hereby command the Armed Forces of the Philippines, to maintain law and order throughout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless violence as well [as] any act of insurrection or rebellion and to enforce obedience to all the laws and to all decrees, orders and regulations promulgated by me personally or upon my direction." Which might be fine and dandy except no president since Marcos has claimed the right to issue decrees; not even Cory Aquino, during the period of absolute power she enjoyed until the ratification of the present Constitution, was bold, careless, or crass enough to use that word. And yet, Ms Arroyo does: because her lawyers copied the language from Marcos, and the President, who presumably closely reads everything she signs, found nothing offensive with the presumption she can issue decrees, even in a democratic setting.
If you, the reader, are inclined to quibble with me about one word in a document, bear in mind that for writers, lawyers and readers-that is, for everyone who is literate-words are everything. Be that as it may, here's an additional point.
The President's personal lawyer, Romulo Macalintal, has been parroting a phrase to defend the President's proclamation (regardless of the origin of part of its contents): "Presumption of regularity." This is, indeed, something that accompanies all issuances coming from government authorities. It is also the weakest of rhetorical appeals-an appeal to authority.
When the government uses a warrant issued by the dictatorship to arrest an elected member of the House, 21 years after the warrant was issued; when a professor and students, who dare to exercise their democratic rights, and insist on doing it peacefully such that they take the trouble to dialogue with the police, are assaulted, rounded up, detained and questioned-only to be released without charges; when a newspaper is raided and its issue for the day prevented from rolling off the press; and then the government appoints military minders to watch over it while the presidential chief of staff claims, without batting an eyelash, that this does not constitute editorial interference; when the justice secretary and the head of the national police make pointed remarks that they can arbitrarily decide which media can continue to function (implying all media operates on their sufferance); when it is announced that a widow wanting to lay a wreath at the foot of the monument of her husband, and those who wish to recall their efforts to overthrow a dictatorship, all face the possibility of arrest or at least "dispersal"; there can be no presumption of regularity. There can only be a presumption of irregularity.
Fear, selectively applied, is the dusk announcing the more promiscuous enforcement of terror in the dark night that's falling. Intimidation is required if selective official amnesia is to prevail.
Consider that Brig. Gen. Danilo Lim is said to have attempted to convince the AFP chief of staff to join him in withdrawing support from the President. The armed forces has said, in no uncertain terms, that in its determination of the facts, General Lim wanted to join ralliers and make his position known. As far as the chronology goes, this means a mutiny was contemplated by disgruntled military elements, and not a coup d'etat. Withdrawal of support was what the President and her husband actively courted the leadership of the armed forces to undertake Edsa II; and while it is said that history is written by the victors, it must also be seen that she herself once encouraged what she now condemns.
But then, we are dealing with a government whose chief of police proudly proclaimed last Friday: "We have liberated Edsa." From whom, you might ask? Why, from the people. It is a proud boast that Ferdinand Marcos once so badly wanted to make.
The Palace proclaimed a strange kind of victory: the kind that requires a continuing state of siege. It trumpeted the triumph of order and democracy-at the expense of liberty. It has substituted CPR, EO 464 and Proclamation 1017, for liberty, equality and fraternity. We are left with the bow-wow-wow, the yip-yip-yip, of a lapdog republic, in which Palace pets are all vying to paw and sniff at the Palace food and water bowl: and snarling at anyone questioning their position in the pack.
Pinoys no longer afraid of martial rule
http://news.inq7.net/opinion/index.php?index=2&story_id=67683
Pinoys no longer afraid of martial rule
First posted 04:45am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Neal H. Cruz
Inquirer
WASN'T IT SAD AND IRONIC THAT ON THE very day that we were commemorating the 20th anniversary of Edsa I, that shining moment in our history when we broke the chains of a dictator, another dictator would emerge and put us back in chain, virtually bringing us again into those dark days of martial law? What is happening in our poor country today is proving the saying that "history repeats itself."
What is happening is eerily a repeat of the early days of martial law. It is as if we are dreaming of the bad old days, only to wake up and find out that the dream is for real, after all.
In 1972, Ferdinand Marcos faked an ambush, where the car of then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile (without Enrile in it) was peppered with bullets. The "incident" was used as an excuse to declare martial law. On the same night, soldiers swooped down on the offices of all the newspapers and closed them; they also rounded scores of the administration critics. Years later, the same Enrile, with the help of People Power, would lead a coup to successfully oust Marcos from Malacañang.
It was that shining moment that we were celebrating when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) did a Marcos and proclaimed a "state of emergency." But judging from the draconian measures that she imposed, the proclamation is almost a declaration of martial law. (Proclamation 1017 is only a number different from Proclamation 1081, the instrument with which Marcos declared martial law. And 1017's first "Whereas" is almost a word-for-word reproduction from 108l.)
Soon after, soldiers swooped down on the offices of The Daily Tribune and closed it. In other places, selected personalities were arrested. Yesterday, the Philippine National Police warned that other media outlets would be closed, too, if they don't toe the government line. Shades of Marcos!
It is said that all living organisms learn from their mistakes and adjust to their environment, from the tiny virus that mutates to protect itself, to the giant trees that learn to adjust the size and forms of their leaves to better use sun and rain. GMA is among that group of smart organisms who have learned from the mistakes of others. She has learned from the mistakes of Marcos and Erap.
Marcos' mistake in Edsa I was that he vacillated and allowed the crowd at Edsa to grow big. By the time his tanks rolled out, it was too late. The tanks couldn't get through the crowds and Marcos wouldn't let them run over or fire their cannons at people and at Camp Crame where the rebels were holed up.
GMA learned from that mistake. That is why she unleashed her police to disperse the rallies at Edsa before they could get any bigger. That is why she cancelled all rally permits. That is why she is denigrating People Power. Although she herself benefited from it, she wants it to go out of fashion before she herself becomes another of its victims.
And as fear is the ally of tyranny, she is now sowing fear with the arrest of selected personalities. As the media are expected to resist another dark age, they are being terrorized with raids and stern warnings for them "to behave or else." Real, full-blown terrorism is upon us and it is not coming from al-Qaeda, the NPA or the MILF, but from our own government, the AFP and police, the very agencies that are tasked to protect all the people, not the President alone.
But the people have learned, too. Having survived 14 years of Marcos' dictatorship, they are no longer afraid of another martial regime. They are no longer afraid of being arrested and imprisoned. Being arrested now for political offenses is a badge of honor. Indeed, many of the people that Marcos had clamped in jail were later elected by the people to the Senate, to the House of Representatives, to local government units. Some of them even became Cabinet members. Many of our present leaders now, pro- and anti-administration, were former Marcos detainees.
So being arrested and jailed is no longer something to fear. People now feel honored if they are singled out for arrest and feel insulted if they are ignored.
Filipinos love rebels. This is so because of our history of being abused by colonizers and tyrants. All our great heroes were rebels- from Dagohoy to Bonifacio and Rizal to Macario Sakay to Ninoy Aquino-who fought against foreign invaders and home-grown tyrants.
During the Spanish and American colonial regimes, the Filipinos kept waging separate pocket revolts. They were beaten back by the far superior colonizers but they kept trying and finally succeeded. During the Japanese Occupation, practically all the young men became guerrillas, and in the NPA and Muslim rebellions, bright young men and women from the best universities have gone to the hills to join the rebels.
No, arrest and detention don't scare Filipinos anymore. Neither does the closure of media outlets scare journalists. Like viruses that mutate, media will find ways to provide the people with information, especially now that we have the Internet, the "Xerox" machines and the cell phones. Underground newspapers will come out, in mimeographed or "Xeroxed" copies. Paradoxically, the more you try to suppress them the more people will become curious to read them.
The best thing that has happened to the Tribune was the police raid on its offices and facilities. Before, it had a very small circulation; hardly anybody paid it any attention. Now suddenly, because of the raid, people are curiously talking about it, and it would surely be sold out when it resumes publication, clandestinely or not.
Ironically, the Arroyo administration just made the Tribune, its staunchest critic, a sensational success. GMA's regime has shot itself in the foot.
Pinoys no longer afraid of martial rule
First posted 04:45am (Mla time) Feb 27, 2006
By Neal H. Cruz
Inquirer
WASN'T IT SAD AND IRONIC THAT ON THE very day that we were commemorating the 20th anniversary of Edsa I, that shining moment in our history when we broke the chains of a dictator, another dictator would emerge and put us back in chain, virtually bringing us again into those dark days of martial law? What is happening in our poor country today is proving the saying that "history repeats itself."
What is happening is eerily a repeat of the early days of martial law. It is as if we are dreaming of the bad old days, only to wake up and find out that the dream is for real, after all.
In 1972, Ferdinand Marcos faked an ambush, where the car of then Defense Minister Juan Ponce Enrile (without Enrile in it) was peppered with bullets. The "incident" was used as an excuse to declare martial law. On the same night, soldiers swooped down on the offices of all the newspapers and closed them; they also rounded scores of the administration critics. Years later, the same Enrile, with the help of People Power, would lead a coup to successfully oust Marcos from Malacañang.
It was that shining moment that we were celebrating when Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo (GMA) did a Marcos and proclaimed a "state of emergency." But judging from the draconian measures that she imposed, the proclamation is almost a declaration of martial law. (Proclamation 1017 is only a number different from Proclamation 1081, the instrument with which Marcos declared martial law. And 1017's first "Whereas" is almost a word-for-word reproduction from 108l.)
Soon after, soldiers swooped down on the offices of The Daily Tribune and closed it. In other places, selected personalities were arrested. Yesterday, the Philippine National Police warned that other media outlets would be closed, too, if they don't toe the government line. Shades of Marcos!
It is said that all living organisms learn from their mistakes and adjust to their environment, from the tiny virus that mutates to protect itself, to the giant trees that learn to adjust the size and forms of their leaves to better use sun and rain. GMA is among that group of smart organisms who have learned from the mistakes of others. She has learned from the mistakes of Marcos and Erap.
Marcos' mistake in Edsa I was that he vacillated and allowed the crowd at Edsa to grow big. By the time his tanks rolled out, it was too late. The tanks couldn't get through the crowds and Marcos wouldn't let them run over or fire their cannons at people and at Camp Crame where the rebels were holed up.
GMA learned from that mistake. That is why she unleashed her police to disperse the rallies at Edsa before they could get any bigger. That is why she cancelled all rally permits. That is why she is denigrating People Power. Although she herself benefited from it, she wants it to go out of fashion before she herself becomes another of its victims.
And as fear is the ally of tyranny, she is now sowing fear with the arrest of selected personalities. As the media are expected to resist another dark age, they are being terrorized with raids and stern warnings for them "to behave or else." Real, full-blown terrorism is upon us and it is not coming from al-Qaeda, the NPA or the MILF, but from our own government, the AFP and police, the very agencies that are tasked to protect all the people, not the President alone.
But the people have learned, too. Having survived 14 years of Marcos' dictatorship, they are no longer afraid of another martial regime. They are no longer afraid of being arrested and imprisoned. Being arrested now for political offenses is a badge of honor. Indeed, many of the people that Marcos had clamped in jail were later elected by the people to the Senate, to the House of Representatives, to local government units. Some of them even became Cabinet members. Many of our present leaders now, pro- and anti-administration, were former Marcos detainees.
So being arrested and jailed is no longer something to fear. People now feel honored if they are singled out for arrest and feel insulted if they are ignored.
Filipinos love rebels. This is so because of our history of being abused by colonizers and tyrants. All our great heroes were rebels- from Dagohoy to Bonifacio and Rizal to Macario Sakay to Ninoy Aquino-who fought against foreign invaders and home-grown tyrants.
During the Spanish and American colonial regimes, the Filipinos kept waging separate pocket revolts. They were beaten back by the far superior colonizers but they kept trying and finally succeeded. During the Japanese Occupation, practically all the young men became guerrillas, and in the NPA and Muslim rebellions, bright young men and women from the best universities have gone to the hills to join the rebels.
No, arrest and detention don't scare Filipinos anymore. Neither does the closure of media outlets scare journalists. Like viruses that mutate, media will find ways to provide the people with information, especially now that we have the Internet, the "Xerox" machines and the cell phones. Underground newspapers will come out, in mimeographed or "Xeroxed" copies. Paradoxically, the more you try to suppress them the more people will become curious to read them.
The best thing that has happened to the Tribune was the police raid on its offices and facilities. Before, it had a very small circulation; hardly anybody paid it any attention. Now suddenly, because of the raid, people are curiously talking about it, and it would surely be sold out when it resumes publication, clandestinely or not.
Ironically, the Arroyo administration just made the Tribune, its staunchest critic, a sensational success. GMA's regime has shot itself in the foot.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)