Category: enrile

senators holding-up RH bill

RH interpellation cancelled again today.  excuse ni senator sotto last monday, when it was also cancelled, kesyo hindi daw handa ang mga dapat mag-interpellate, so it’s out of his hands, or something to that effect.

ah so, kaya si senate president enrile pa rin ang nakasalang last tuesday and wednesday, kasi siya lang ang handa, at hindi pa raw siya tapos.  ano ba yan.  so bakit hindi itinuloy today as scheduled para matapos na si enrile?  at bakit hindi i-extend ang sessions para matapos na si enrile?  at kung hindi handa ang iba pang senador na naka-sked na mag-interpellate pagkatapos ni enrile, bakit hindi puwedeng they lose their chance, forever keep their silence, and allow the bill to be voted upon finally?  the senate is being run like an old boys’ club, and so openly and shamelessly at that.

reproductive health has been on the agenda of congress since 1998, pero lagi na lang nauudlot, never mind that 7 out of 10 filipinos want it.  bakit nga ba ang minority ang nasusunod?

here’s a facebook exchange with sylvia mayuga a.k.a. sylvia morningstar some minutes ago.

Stuart Santiago via bethangsioco on tweeter. FYI: Senate RH bill interpellation today is cancelled per Tito Sotto’s office. BOO!

Sylvia Morningstar BOO? O BOBO?

Stuart Santiago parang hindi bobo, sylvs, more like deliberately knowingly craftily delaying the progress of interpellations so that it never comes to a vote, so BOO!

Sylvia Morningstar Sige. Sabay tayo – BOO, TITO SOTTO!

Stuart Santiago and BOO, ENRILE! and BOO! to all interpellators na hindi handa kuno (this was sotto’s excuse last monday)!

Sylvia Morningstar Matay ko mang isipin, Angie, hindi ko maintindihan ang trip ng mga senadores na ‘to. Hindi naman sila masasabing maka-relihiyon, at alam din nilang hindi na ganoon kalakas ang mga obispo sa taong bayang pabor sa RH (70% daw ang support). E bakit sila nagpapaka-gago, sa palagay mo?

Stuart Santiago ito ang sey ni senator osmena: “There is definitely a very strong group lobbying against it. I cannot blame those who want to remain under the radar,” he said.

Stuart Santiago para bagang kay mideo, di man ganoong kalaki ang blind followers ng mga obispo, sila pa rin ang nasunod, di ba? it almost seems like the bishops have something on these senators, something unimaginable that does not necessarily have anything to do with RH…

Sylvia Morningstar Ha! Pera o babae? Or both?

Stuart Santiago pera, babae, america?

Sylvia Morningstar Sus, ginoo. Ano naman ang mapapala ng America sa pagdami natin? Labor force? Oversea military cannon fodder in case of a war with China? Or just another stupid unguided missile from the CIA?

Stuart Santiago haha. might not have anything to do with population ek. maybe some trade or debt or ex-deals we know nothing about, kaya rin hindi matuloytuloy ang FOI ?

Sylvia Morningstar Hmm. Makapagtanong nga.

Sylvia Morningstar Matagal nang basket case ang Konggreso. Unti-unting na ring nawawala ang credibility ng Senado. On the defensive na ang Supreme Court. Si Noy, now you believe him, now you don’t. Sa madali’t sabi, the nation is adrift.

Stuart Santiago RH might be tipping point?

Sylvia Morningstar Or a trigger to a series of tipping points…

 

burying marcos

in the matter of the marcos burial, i don’t know na whom or what to believe.  did vp binay really recommend to the president that marcos be buried in ilocos with full military honors?

philstar‘s marichu villanueva is all the way in las vegas but her inside info on the reported binay proposal gives me pause.

If we are to believe reports from Manila, Binay allegedly recommended to P-Noy that Marcos’ remains be interred in his hometown in Batac, Ilocos Norte. There, Marcos will be given instead full military honors for his service as a soldier during World War II despite questions on the medals awarded to him for bravery and heroism.

…Binay’s spokesman Joey Salgado immediately issued an official disclaimer on the contents of the OVP report. Salgado noted that talks on a possible military burial for Marcos originated from the Palace and not from Binay, and neither from any OVP officials involved in the study.

can’t wait to hear from the vp himself what’s what.  can’t wait for some investigative journalist to find out exactly what’s going on.   if the military burial is a palace idea, bakit hindi aminin?  just testing the waters?  makes me think that the unnamed sources are actually from the three-headed hydra.  hello?  hello?  hello?  and what does that say about the president’s “bias” against an honorable burial for marcos?  that it’s not non-negotiable pala?  he’s willing to be overruled kuno?  ano ba yan.  ito man lang, di niya kayang panindigan?

needless to say i agree with senator rene saguisag who was on strictly politics the other night and who is vehemently against a burial for the dictator with any kind of honors.  marcos may have done some good during his long unconstitutional reign but he did a lot more bad.  and for pro-marcos forces to continue to try and re-write martial law and EDSA history and whitewash the marcos image in aid of son bongbong’s presidential ambitions (he should stop denying it dahil obvious naman) is just an insult, plain and simple, to the intelligence of straight thinking filipinos.

which brings me to peter wallace, the australian businessman who has a column in the manila standard, whose take on the marcos burial drew a critical rejoinder from no less than senate president juan ponce enrile.

this is what wallace wrote, may 27:

As to Ferdinand Marcos, I cannot for the life of me understand why there’s any discussion at all about where to bury Marcos. The man was a despot, a mass murderer and torturer, a plunderer, a philanderer (Dovie Beams), and I don’t know what else. If he was a war hero, and recent evidence seems to strongly debunk this, it is completely negated by his subsequent actions.

President Aquino, if he’s truly the moral, honest man he claims (and I certainly believe is) has a no-brainer here. You don’t pass it to anyone else to decide. It’s a simple presidential decision: NO.

googled but couldn’t find enrile’s response — apparently sent to manila standard — except as tweeted by bongbong chum bong daza, and quoted/cited by fellow standard columnist emil jurado on may 31:

…Senate President Juan Ponce Enrile, reacting to the comments of Wallace, said:

“President Marcos is dead. He cannot defend himself against scurrilous attacks against him. I have not known him to have sent people to a Siberian concentration camp like Stalin, or to extermination camps such as Auschwitz like Hitler, or to killing fields like Pol Pot, or to mass graves like Saddam Hussein.

“And so, as one who served in his regime for many years and as his secretary, later minister of national defense for almost 16 years, I would like to seek Wallace’s clarification about what he said about Marcos being a mass murderer and torturer.”

…I respect Wallace’s opinion on the issue, but I agree with Enrile who said “I hope Wallace will agree with me that we have to be fair to President Marcos no matter what our individual opinion might be. We also have to be fair to his readers.”

so far wallace hasn’t responded, as jurado points out, rather happily? in yesterday’s column.  na-intimidate kaya?  o ayaw lang pumatol?

but because silence would give pro-marcos forces the impression that the senate prez is right, let me pitch in my two cents.

take note that enrile challenges only the part about marcos being a “mass murderer and torturer.”  so the despot, plunderer, philanderer, dubious war hero accusations stand, and do not need substantiating here.  as for the murder and torture, they were not  on the same scale as those perpetrated by stalin, hitler, the khmer rouge, and hussein but they were nonetheless criminally condemnably iniquitous.

i happen to have access to the  historian alfred w. mccoy‘s latest book on the philippines: POLICING AMERICA’S EMPIRE: The United States, The Philippines, and the Rise of the Surveillance State (2009) yet unavailable in our bookstores.  in the chapter “Martial Law Terror” subheading “State Terror” page 403, he writes:

Initially, Marcos’s military had relied on the legal formalities of arrest and detention to suppress dissent. In issuing Proclamation 1081 to declare martial law in September 1972, Marcos had invoked Article VII of the 1935 Constitution providing that the president “in case of invasion, insurrection, or rebellion . . . may suspend the privileges of the writ of habeas corpus, or place the Philippines . . . under martial law.” In his next paragraph Marcos issued a sweeping order that all suspects arrested from crimes against public order “be kept under detention until otherwise ordered released by me.” (1) In the weeks following this declaration, the regime rounded up some fifty thousand alleged subversives. Although the number of those officially detained fell to six thousand by May 1975, the police continued to make arrests without warrants. Armed with a blanket Arrest Search and Seizure Order (ASSO) or Presidential Commitment Order (PCO), they routinely confined suspects in extralegal “safe houses” for “tactical interrogations”. (2)

During the last years of Marcos’s rule, the police grew increasingly brutal, making torture and salvaging standard procedure against both poltiical dissidents and petty criminals. Recent graduates of the Philippine Military Academy (PMA) who joined the constabulary were socialized into a permissive ethos of torture, corruption, and impunity. With unchecked legal authority, limitless funds, and immersion in both psychological and physical torture, a cohort of privileged police commanders formed in the upper ranks of the elite PC anti-subversion squads, the Metrocom Intelligence Service Group (MISG) and Fifth Constabulary Security Unit (CSU). Over time martial law transformed the top police into an empowered elite engaged in systemic human rights abuses and syndicated gambling, drugs, or smuggling. Under Marcos military murder was the apex of a pyramid of terror with 3,257 killed, an estimated 35,000 tortured, and some 70,000 arrested. To subdue the population with terror, some 2,520 victims, an overwhelming 77 percent of Filipinos who died, were salvaged, that is, tortured and killed with the scarred remains dumped for display. (3)

mccoy goes into detail further on, but duties call.  maybe later…

sources:

(1) Joseph Ralston Hayden, The Philippines: A Study in National Development (New York, 1955) 833; Republic of the Philippines, Supreme Court, Martial Law and the New Society in the Philippines (Manila, 1977), 1878-79.

(2) Amnesty International, Report of an Amnesty International Mission to the Republic of the Philippines, 11-28 November 1981 (London, 1982), 1-9, 56-66.

(3) New York Times, 11/10/86; Richard J. Kessler, Rebellion and Repression in the Philippines (New Haven, 1989), 137. To reach the figure 3,527 killed under Marcos, Kessler’s enumeration for 1975-85 is supplemented by adding 93 more “extrajudicial killings” in 1984 from data in Rev. La Verne D. Mercado and Sr. Mariani Dimaranan’s Philippines: Testimonies on Human Rights Violations (Geneva, 1986), 89.

when enrile crossed edsa to join ramos in crame

“The military spokesperson, Brig. Gen. Jose Mabanta Jr., said the 2,000 soldiers and two tanks will take part in reenacting the salubong or the welcome given by the crowds gathered at EDSA to military forces who turned against then dictator Ferdinand Marcos.”

how romantic the spin on enrile leaving camp aguinaldo and crossing edsa on day 2, feb 23.   indeed it was quite a dramatic event because it was the first time the people saw enrile, and ramos, who met him at the crame gate, whom they’d been shielding from marcos, and of course they went crazy, chanting johnny johnny johnny, lauding the defense minister who had dared defy the dictator to support cory aquino, or so they thought.

The people linked arms, creating a protective wall for the reformist troops. Col. Honasan forged ahead to shield Minister Enrile as they crossed the street. Honasan was very scared when they started out. But when they hit the first row of people, and the people started to wipe the soldiers’ brow, give them food, and thank them, Honasan knew they had won. “All my fears disappeared. The worst scenario, for me, was not that we would have been bombed but that the people might turn against us.”

enrile had decided to join ramos in crame to consolidate forces, camp crame being smaller, easier to defend.   but in fact ramos had suggested the move early that morning when he jogged over to aguinaldo, and enrile and honasan had said no.

Sonny Razon: General Ramos had been asking them to move to Crame since morning pa. But at that point, they weren’t convinced yet of the need to consolidate forces. In fact, they would have preferred it if General Ramos moved to Aguinaldo instead.

i think that enrile was loathe to move in with ramos because he suspected that ramos was a coryista.   day one, when enrile asked him to join them in aguinaldo, ramos was having a dialogue with coryistas picketing his house in alabang, urging him to resign and join cory’s camp, like his sister leticia shahani had done in december 85.   ramos had given every indication that he was just waiting for the right time to make such a move.   and he took his time making chika with the coryistas, so that enrile’s men had to call several times, asking him to come, now na.

enrile may have been uncertain where ramos’s sympathies really lay.   but when news came of tadiar’s convoy of tanks and apcs leaving fort bonifacio and making its way to edsa, for real, kinabahan na rin siguro siya and moving to crame was the wisest thing to do, never mind his dream of becoming president.

Synchronous events: the people stopping tanks in Ortigas, and Enrile crossing Edsa to join Ramos. The coincidence of the people’s peak experience with Enrile’s move indicates that there was more to the crossing than a simple consolidation of forces. Ramos had earlier urged them to move but Enrile and RAM were reluctant to give up Aguinaldo and, perhaps more so, to give in to Ramos, who was by then perceived to be for Cory.

In a sense the dramatic crossing signified Enrile’s surrender to forces other than RAM, and it was as critical and momentous as the people’s encounter with tanks.

in EDSA, the crucial conflict was not between cory and marcos anymore — marcos was a goner; it was only a matter of time before he either stepped down voluntarily or was forced out, given the boycott, and later, given the ortigas stand-off, when the people stopped the tanks and the marines defied his orders.

in EDSA, the crucial conflict was between cory and enrile.   they had the same objective, to oust marcos and take over, and neither had any intention of giving way to the other, much less of joining forces.

that fateful EDSA weekend derailed both cory and enrile from their separate paths.   the people, taking matters into their own hands and demonstrating their awesome power to render marcos powerless, gave cory and enrile no choice but to reconcile their differences and submit to the people’s will.

cory had no choice but to reconcile with the same military that had caused her and ninoy so much pain and suffering (enrile was ninoy’s jailer).   enrile had no choice but to submit to cory, a civilian housewife without experience in state and military affairs.   EDSA was just too dramatic and decisive to ignore.

when he crossed edsa, leaving his own turf for safer ground, it was like enrile was bowing to the will of the people and taking the first step towards reconciliation.

so it wasn’t just a salubong, which romantic notion depoliticizes, even trivializes, that high point of the revolution.   i wonder whose idea it was.  the edsa commission has been doing a reenactment year after year after year.   and year after year after year it is played up by a gullible, uncritical, and unwittingly complicit mainstream media.

honasan, kapunan, enrile, finally!

gringo honasan was first introduced to the edsa crowds and the press on day 4, feb 25, around 4 p.m. enrile and ramos and the reformists were preparing to leave camp crame to reclaim camp aguinaldo across edsa.

With the Marcos regime crumbling by the hour, Enrile introduced Gringo Honasan to a jubilant crowd outside their headquarters as the man who precipitated the President’s fall.

Honasan denied plotting to kill Marcos and told the crowd: “We did not plan any coup d’etat or assasination. Our action was purely for the purpose of survival.”

of course honasan had to deny it, after enrile himself had denied it on radio veritas the night before.   enrile however confirmed the coup plot 14 years later, in 2000:

enrile finally admitted in a radio interview that indeed he and his men had plotted a violent takeover of the marcos regime that was pre-empted by people power [philippine star 28 feb 2000 page 2].

and so another 11 years later, hallelujah!  honasan and fellow conspirator eduardo “red” kapunan, leaders of RAM in 86, finally admit that they had planned a “military operation” but they were found out, and so they ended up making a last stand in camp aguinaldo.   red kapunan in anc’s strictly politics last tuesday, and senator honasan in his blogpost I remember Edsa:

RAM’s plan was to conduct a military operation against the very seat of political power, with a handful of specially trained men, and against overwhelming odds, and present those accountable alive and unharmed to the Filipino people for judgment. We were willing to die to show the Filipino people, and the world, that there were still professional soldiers who truly loved their country. That would pave the way for a National Unification Council composed of credible representatives of Philippine society, including then presidential candidate Corazon C. Aquino. The council would oversee the country’s return to full democracy, with institutional and systemic reforms in place.

The plan was discovered, and a consensus was reached among RAM members and then Minister of National Defense Juan Ponce Enrile. RAM would go to Camp Aguinaldo at 2 pm on February 22, 1986, where the officers recruited by RAM all over the country could rally and extend physical and symbolic support to Minister Enrile, RAM, and then Gen. Fidel Ramos, who joined them later.

why did gringo, and enrile, deny the coup plot back in feb 86?

Enrile’s and RAM’s number-one priority was to drum up as much public support as they could. To do this, they had to scuttle any impression that they had been planning a coup d’etat.

If people realized that Enrile had been planning to stage a coup and then impose a junta, most of them certainly would not have been supportive. Enrile and his men had to cover their plans and portray themselves as victims.

this is important because it confirms my reading, and cory’s, that when they planned that coup set for feb 23 sunday, it was to preempt cory’s bid for the presidency.   kumbaga, it was a race to malacanang, una-unahan na lang.   and when they were found out and decided to make that last stand in camp aguinaldo, it was still in the hope of getting the support of the people, offering them an alternative to cory, and of course, of ending the boycott that must have been costing enrile, himself a close crony, next only to danding, millions of bucks everyday.

but because they had denied the coup plot, people got the impression that they were defecting to cory’s side.   and so the people went to edsa chanting cory’s name and wearing waving cory’s colors.   enrile didn’t stand a chance.

on the other hand, if they had admitted to the coup plot and came clean with enrile’s hopes of replacing marcos, he being more qualified than the housewife, no doubt the people would have stayed home and watched from the sidelines as ver wiped them out.

in the end enrile made the right decision, to support the new president, in exchange for… ummm i’m speculating here, but my educated guess is, in exchange for an end to the boycott, and immunity from suit and sequestration of any kind post edsa.

in Some Are Smarter Than Others: The History of Marcos’ Crony Capitalism (New York: Aletheia Publications, 1991) Ricardo Manapat writes:

When the post-Marcos administration organized the Presidential Commission for Good Government (PCGG) to recover the wealth stolen by Marcos and his cronies, Jovito Salonga, the head of the commission, refused to file charges against Enrile or even attempt to investigate him… Testifying before a committee of the Constitutional Commission attempting to draft a new constitution, Salonga, in a very carefully-worded testimony befitting a crafty lawyer, said that there was “no evidence” that “would warrant” the investigation of Enrile, that his name does not appear on any of the documents that PCGG had in its possession, and that there were no complaints against him. Salonga then proceeded to offer Enrile, then still chairman of the United Coconut Planters Bank, five board seats in the multimillion bank as it was being reorganized. [page198]

the senate president said last tuesday that he’s writing his memoirs.

Enrile said he had begun writing his memoirs, noting that there have been “many exaggerations, distortions and omissions” in the accounts written about the events leading to and about EDSA I.

“Now, I think it is about time that, as one of the initiators of the people power revolution in 1986, I finally tell the true events and circumstances that led to the restoration of freedom and democracy in our land,” he said.

yes, sir, please do.   yours is truly an important story that needs telling.