Skip to main contentdfsdf

Home/ stevenwarran's Library/ Notes/ December 11, 2000, Philippine Daily Inquirer, US newspapers see trial of RP democracy, by Amando Doronila,

December 11, 2000, Philippine Daily Inquirer, US newspapers see trial of RP democracy, by Amando Doronila,

from web site

December 11, 2000, Philippine Daily Inquirer, US newspapers see trial of RP democracy, by Amando Doronila,

HONOLULU – Away from the heat of the impeachment trial of President Estrada, the Philippine political crisis takes a different dimension.

As Filipinos quibble over whether the prosecution or the defense gained the upper hand in the first two days of the trial, reports by leading American papers are less concerned about the squalid details of the corruption charges against the President. US newspapers are more concerned about the democratic implications of the crisis.

Reports of the trial by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Los Angeles Times put the impeachment drama in the framework of it being a trial of Philippine democracy, as it is of President Estrada.

True the New York Times highlighted the projection on the screen by the prosecution of a P142-million check, signed by "Jose Valhalla" – a signature allegedly similar to Mr. Estrada’s.

The details of the report tend to underline the stresses of the impeachment process as a constitutional means to remove the President from office.

Basically, the issue is--Can Philippine democracy survive its leadership crisis?

The press in Manila uniformly tends to picture the trial drama like a cockfight or a 15-round world heavyweight boxing championship fight--as in the Muhammad Ali-Joe Frazier "Thrilla in Manila"--with accounts of who’s ahead in points in the early rounds.

It now looks like the trial is not going to have an early knockout, what with the prosecution unable to get its act together.

Filipinos on both sides of the Estrada-resign divide are lusting for blood, and it is very Filipino to be excited over who’s leading in the points each round. This is very exhausting.

Regional stability

Out here in the middle of the Pacific, in the US strategic outpost on the Asia-Pacific rim, the concern of the think tanks and the military brass at the USCINCPAC (US Commander in Chief, Pacific Command) is the overall security and political stability in the vast region.

High on the list of their priority issues are the potential flash points in the Taiwan Straits and the Korean Peninsula as well as the conflict between India and Pakistan over Kashmir, with both sides possessing nuclear weapons.

The second priority is composed of areas of political instability, foremost of which are Indonesia, the Philippines and Taiwan where President Chen Shui-bian also faces an impeachment threat.

Indonesia, Taiwan and the Philippines are democracies, although the first two are new democracies.

Indonesian President Abdurrahman Wahid faces separatist rebellions on islands outside Java and has a fragile grip on power. There are doubts that Wahid, like President Estrada, could last his full five-year term.

Chen, Wahid and Mr. Estrada have been democratically elected, and yet the democratic method of leadership change has been unable to obviate challenges demanding an early end to their terms.

Asia’s new "democratic dividends" that emerged from the political chaos of the 1997 Asian financial crisis are in danger of being wiped out by the political turbulence in these three countries.

More worrisome

Among Pacific Rim strategic think tanks, Indonesia’s stability is more worrisome because it is not only the fourth largest nation in the world and Asean’s linchpin and pivotal power.

Indonesia straddles the sea lanes where much of the Middle East oil supplies pass en route to Northeast Asia and even to the Philippines.

The Lombok and Sunda straits in Indonesia are the gatekeepers of the flow of oil supplies, and therefore the concern is that the Indonesian central state’s loss of control of the provinces could open the sea lanes to interdiction from at least a rising threat--piracy.

The Philippines rates a lower priority of concerns since it is far less strategic in Southeast Asia, but the instability of two Asean democracies--the Philippines and Indonesia--is too much of a stress for the region.

The focus of concern on the Philippines is on the popular move to remove Mr. Estrada--either through impeachment or mass action in the streets.

While there’s hair-splitting over whether the People Power option is constitutional (this is a contentious issue in the Philippines), there’s a point of view here that the impeachment process is a trial of the strength of institutions to manage conflict.

Corollary to this view is the argument that it is bad for democracy that people go to the streets when they are not happy with their governments rather than rely on their institutions to solve conflict. This point of view comes from Western quarters with stable and well-institutionalized democracies.

Flaw

The flaw in this argument is that in the Philippines, political institutions--such as the legislature and the parties--are weak and are easily undermined by the President through payoffs.

Institutions, including the Senate acting as a jury, are not trusted to perform functions to check presidential powers.

Because of lack of trust, movements directed at the removal of President Estrada are bifurcated toward both the impeachment process and the people power action in the streets.

The Philippines has lost its security strategic importance in the region following the withdrawal of the US military bases in Clark and Subic in 1992.

It is now the crisis of Philippine democracy that puts the country on the map of political flash points--as differentiated from war flash points--in the region.

In order to give proportion to our crisis, let us not think of the Filipino way of resolving their leadership crisis as another pacesetter or model for how Asians would evolve their democratization trends.

True, competitive politics has developed in Thailand, Indonesia, South Korea and Taiwan over the past two decades, but each of these countries has taken separate paths to democratization.

The Philippine model is not relevant to them. The current crisis does not inspire them, and this irrelevance is being emphasized in the lack of popular trust and confidence in the impeachment process.

People Power inspired movements toward people’s action to change leadership as far as in Eastern Europe in the late 1980s, and in fact propelled the upheaval that led to the resignation of Indonesian President Suharto in May 1998.

But it is no longer the most important dynamic that drives the demand to remove Mr. Estrada from office.

Trial of institutions

What we see in the Philippines today is the trial of political institutions weakened by corruption to check executive powers.

The worst aspects of democracy have come to light in the Philippines. The rule of the least common denominator has gained salience in the Estrada presidency more than it had in any previous administration.

The populist accent on rhetoric is a manifestation of this rule. Populism--or better still, its rhetoric--has replaced programs to help the poor to buy their loyalty.

The deficient preparation of Mr. Estrada for the presidency is an important example.

Even in the impeachment trial, the prosecution is hobbled by the selection of prosecutors implementing the principle of the least common denominator prevailing in the panel.

The outcome of the trial may well be determined by this principle of mediocrity on the part of the prosecution panel composed of both brilliant and mediocre members--not on lack of evidence

Would you like to comment?

Join Diigo for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.

stevenwarran

Saved by stevenwarran

on Jan 22, 13