Editorial : What price victory?
We do not know if it was with such a classical allusion in mind that Makati Rep. Teddyboy Locsin issued this warning to his peers: throwing out the amended impeachment complaints was like "poisoning the tigers in the cage, only to send out a mouse to face the gladiators in the arena, except now, we are even going to strangle the mouse."
The tiger was the amended Lozano complaint, and the mouse, the original Lozano complaint. The tiger was killed on Tuesday. By a vote of 50 in favor of killing the original Lozano complaint, 4 against, and 1 abstention, the administration majority and its allies in the House ganged up on the mouse on Wednesday night and stomped it to death.
Earlier that day, Speaker Jose de Venecia and Presidential Political Adviser Gabriel Claudio made themselves visible on the floor of the House of Representatives. And Claudio's ear was glued to a cell phone much of the time, a reminder of who was really calling the shots in the proceedings.
The gangland-style killing of the original Lozano complaint occurred despite attempts, feeble though they might have been, to try to at least spread the responsibility for the mouse's doom among all the members of the House in plenary. Cagayan de Oro Rep. Constantino Jaraula and Locsin both argued that a better course of action would have been to take from the amended complaint the items that serve to fortify and clarify the allegations made in the original Lozano complaint. Such a course of action would have been more in keeping with the House's self-proclaimed tradition of compromise. Instead, their recommendations were ignored.
Ignored as well were Cavite Rep. Crispin Remulla's at times rambling warnings that to use brute force now would only guarantee a second round of impeachment attempts in a year's time, and the arguments of other representatives questioning the tactic of using prejudicial questions to clear the path for the mouse's assassination.
The result is that on Monday, all that the members of the House will be asked to do in plenary is to affix their signatures, by way of their votes, to the mouse's death certificate. To paraphrase a familiar old saying, the House has labored, only to bring forth a mouse-and the mouse was squashed on arrival.
It is true that the House has always been known for its subservience to the executive department. But officially existing as the lower half of an independent branch of government, the House does not need to be seen to be so eager to please the President. For the impeachment hearings are about more than giving the President a gift for her trip to the United Nations; they are about giving the people a chance to see their representatives demonstrating their capability to act responsibly.
Democracy is, indeed, about the rule of the majority, but democratic government is also about preventing overwhelming numbers from exhibiting tyrannical behavior toward not only the minority but also its processes. That is why there are debates, and why contending sides are required to ventilate their views. The true nature of the impeachment proceedings in retrospect can be judged not according to the frustrating, often nonsensical behavior of both sides while they remained engaged in committee. It was demonstrated by the lack of thought and due diligence of the proceedings after the debate was reduced to the majority and the very few within its ranks who persisted in displaying independence of thought. In mere minutes, highly contentious issues were settled: issues that have divided not just the House, but the country.
Such was the haste of the pro-administration majority members that they could not put off for Thursday what could be decided late into the night on Wednesday. The last time such indecent haste was on full display was during the canvassing for votes for the presidency. And we know the bitter results of that exercise. It widened the rift between the two sides, it reopened still raw political wounds and it added salt to those wounds. The majority may have gained a victory, but at what price?
