Arangkada for August 1, 2005

 

                CHAVIT O UDONG?

 

        Unsay sunod himoon ni kanhi gobernador Faustino Dy Jr. sa Isabela?   Mahimong laing Chavit Singson?  O sundon ang pagkakak ni Udong Mahusay.  Si Singson, nga karon nahibalik pagka gobernador sa Ilocos Sur. Maisugong nibarug pagbisto sa giingong pagdawat ni kanhi presidente Joseph Estrada sa minilyon ka pesos nga payola sa jueteng.  Samtang si Mahusay mao ang saksi sa Jose Pidal expose ni Senador Panfilo Lacson nga nibakwi sa iyang testimoniya human "giluwas" sa mga sakop sa Presidential Security Group nga gipangulohan ni Environment Secretary Mike Defensor.

        Si Dy gikatahong nakasaksi sa paghatag og tag P2 milyones gikan sa payola sa jueteng ngadto sa kada opisyal sa Comelec nga gitapok sa pinuy-anan ni Presidente Gloria Macapagal Arroyo sa La Vista, Quezon City sa wa pang eleksiyon sa Mayo sa niaging tuig.   Kon dasonan ni Dy ang pasangil, masaligon ang oposisyon nga matiwas nang administrasyong Arroyo.

-o0o-  

        Ang maayong balita parang Presidente Arroyo mao nga di moboluntaryo si Dy paghatag sa importanten niyang kasayuran.   Gani, gipanghimakak na sa mga paryente ni Dy ang pangangkon nga pamatud-an niya nga nitambong si Presidente Arroyo sa paghatag og suburno ngadto sa mga opisyal sa Comelec nga gitapok ni kanhi Commissioner Virgilio Garcillano.

        Pero ang daotang balita parang Presidente Arroyo mao nga duna say kasaligang mga tinubdan nga nipahibawo nga nipasidaan si Dy nga di siya mamakak kon ipatawag sa nagpadayong imbestigasyon sa mga komitiba sa Senado sa jueteng sa giingong kalambigitan sa mga Arroyo sa jueteng.  Labaw na kon mahinayon ang gikahinaman nga impeachment trial batok ni Presidente Arroyo.

        Maong di ikahibung ang mga taho nga naglumba ang mga representante sa Malakanyang ug sa oposisyon pagtultol sa nahimutangan ni Dy sa Estados Unidos aron kumbinsihon pagtabang sa nagkabangga nilang mga kawsa.

-o0o-

        Si Arsobispo Oscar Cruz, kinsa wa pa moangkon nga si Dy ang labing lig-ong saksi sa iyang expose sa jueteng, niangkon nga di lunsay ang motibo sa iyang sunod saksi.   Mga higala ni Dy niingon nga nasuko siya dihang nabisto sa Garci tape nga gisakripisyo sa Malakanyang ang iyang paningkamot pagpugong sa proklamasyon sa iyang kaatbang nga si Grace Padaca aron pagseguro nga di maapektahan ang mga boto sa presidente.

        Ang grabeng kasuko giingong maoy nakapugos ni Dy pagbisto sa iyang sekreto ngadto sa usa sa labing inilang lider sa oposisyon, si kanhi senador Vicente Sotto III dihang nagkakita sila sa Los Angeles niadtong Hunyo ning tuiga.  Si Sotto, nga wa igdungog nga maayong motago og sekreto, maoy gidudahang nipakatap sa kasayuran hangtod nga niabot sa atensiyon sa arsobispo.

        Laing kredito sa kaligdong sa kampanya ni Cruz:  Giingong giawhag niya si Dy pagpirma og affidavit sa wa pa motoo sa seryusong pasangil.   [30]  leo_lastimosa@abs-cbn.com 

Inquirer Editorial

Editorial : Join the issue

July 30, 2005
Inquirer News Service

IS there an ideal time to amend the Constitution? The way opposition leaders have spoken out against the very notion of a "great debate" on Charter change, one would think that the answer is a categorical Yes. The real answer, however, is more complicated than the opposition makes it seem.

If in fact the ideal conditions were met -- let's assume these include the lack of economic uncertainty, the lack of a political crisis, and the lack of a leadership suspected of hiding ulterior motives -- the drive to improve the Constitution would itself lose momentum. The reason is elementary: If the system can give rise to such conditions in the first place, why fix it?

Not that anything resembling an ideal state of conditions would ever be reached. Constitutional change will always have economic costs or depend on political trade-offs; there will always be some kind of economic or political constraints. Not least, the entire political class, not just its leadership, will always be suspected of acting out of self-interest.

The argument that we should postpone the debate on Constitutional amendments to better times, therefore, has more leaks than the Titanic. There are no ideal conditions for Charter change.

By definition, pressure for a constitutional amendment reflects an existing problem in the constitutional order. The more severe the problem, the more acute the pressure.

Has the country come to such a pass? The most discussed options for dealing with today's political crisis -- from a revolutionary government to impeachment-plus-a-Truth-Commission -- suggest that such a problem already exists. At the very least, the number of Filipinos who may be willing to try something other than business-as-usual implies that there is, in fact, a constituency for Charter change.

But the opposition's real argument is more immediate: The debate on Charter change is part of President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo's strategy to hold on to power: to avoid impeachment by complicating the work of Congress, to forestall resignation by designing a so-called graceful exit.

In this view, to take part in the debate would be to play the President's game; it would be to play the role of an accomplice in a new crime, that of the mother of all cover-ups.

To which we can only say: The opposition should try less drama and more imagination.

Yes, Charter change can be a trap, in the exact same way that the impeachment process can be a trap too: that is, if anti-Arroyo lawmakers see themselves as mice rather than men.

The "terrible sword" of impeachment is deliberately unwieldy; it was designed to be unsheathed only with difficulty. That it is difficult to use is not an excuse for the minority to avoid it; in fact, the constitutional provisions on impeachment specifically allow the minority to override the majority. As the case of President Joseph Estrada in November 2000 proved, the numbers game could be a trap for the majority too.

Charter change will perhaps be an even more complicated process. Senate resistance to any fast-tracking of constitutional amendments is formidable; but as the Estrada impeachment case also proved, public pressure and the weight of evidence can turn any numbers game around.

That is the rationale behind the President's so-called media blitz. This permanent campaign has been received only as an attempt to make over Ms Arroyo's image and raise her survey ratings. But it is also an initiative to make the case for Charter change.

The fact that Charter change is now the topic of discussion in many parts of the country is proof of the presidency's power to set the national agenda. The President's bully pulpit may have sustained some damage in the last two months, but it is still largely intact.

It is incumbent on the opposition, therefore, to take part in the discussion. Engagement is the only way they can influence the agenda or prevent the President from monopolizing it.

If they refuse to do the necessary work-of educating the public, for instance, that federalism does not necessarily require a parliamentary form of government or that a parliamentary system does not need to be unicameral-they will effectively be ceding the battleground to the President.