Silence Is Violence

SILENCE IS VIOLENCE

Which PH institutions are holding fast? (Part 1)

By John Nery 

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:11 AM February 06, 2018

...the crucial question Kleinfeld asked involved the subject of resistance. Which institutions were “pushing back” against this undermining of the rule of law? I made a distinction between institutions that are “holding fast” and institutions that are pushing back. (This week I’ll limit myself to the first.)

The Philippine military is not anti-Duterte. It would be more precise to say it is not so much nonpolitical as it is antipolitics. In the second decade of the 21st century, the lessons of the second half of the 20th have finally taken firm root: A politicized military is a weaker military. Institutions designed to defend the Constitution should not undermine the constitutional order. The Armed Forces of the Philippines serves the people at all times, not the government temporarily in power (or at least not only). Professionalism should be the byword and benchmark of the armed services. It is by quietly insisting on this hard-won sense of professionalism that the AFP may be said to be holding fast, rather than pushing back.

One challenge for the military: While its leaders have categorically refused to take part in a revolutionary government, in part because it is plainly unconstitutional, they will have no choice if President Duterte, helped by his enablers in the Supreme Court, declares nationwide martial law: They will follow any orders with the semblance of constitutionality.

Another institution that has not pushed back but may be said to have held fast is the Catholic Church. Its collective approach to the Duterte administration’s signature antidrugs campaign can be described as calibrated: It has raised the alarm over extrajudicial killings, but it has not denied the rationale behind the campaign. In fact, it has stepped up its drug rehabilitation efforts.

Individual bishops have criticized the campaign and the killings that follow in its wake; the bishops as a whole have condemned the new culture of “fake news” and other forms of disinformation as immoral and irrational—but the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines has not confronted the President directly for the violence against mostly poor Filipinos that the state inspires, instigates, or implements.

One challenge for the Church hierarchy: Even though the bishops have skillfully walked the tightrope between criticism and collaboration, the reality is that many government officials, and the entire Duterte support infrastructure, already see the Church as anti-Duterte. (To be continued)

https://opinion.inquirer.net/110823/ph-institutions-holding-fast#ixzz56HPVP9tc

Which PH institutions are pushing back? (Part 2)

By John Nery

Philippine Daily Inquirer / 05:20 AM February 13, 2018

At the launch of the Rule of Law Index in Washington, DC the other week, forum moderator Rachel Kleinfeld of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace asked a crucial question. In those countries like Venezuela and the Philippines where adherence to the rule of law has weakened (as measured according to the Index’s eight factors), which institutions were “pushing back”? In my answer, I distinguished between institutions that are pushing back and institutions that are “holding fast” (including a military which abhors the vacuum of politicization and a Roman Catholic Church which, despite its efforts to engage the government policy agenda, is seen by Duterte supporters as anti-Duterte).

What do I understand by pushing back? It might be best to cite specific examples.

I share the sense of many that Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales is a true profile in courage. It is her cutting candor that Filipinos find both refreshing and inspiring. For instance, last September, in response to an extraordinary provocation from President Duterte, she issued a statement that was shared widely and discussed avidly. After the President threatened to have her office—the government’s primary graft-busting agency—investigated for “partiality,” she replied thus: “Sorry, Mr. President, but this Office shall not be intimidated.” She ended her statement with a sentence that recalled the line Mr. Duterte and his allies often use, but in a subtle tables-are-turned way: “The President’s announcement that he intends to create a commission to investigate the Ombudsman appears to have to do with this Office’s ongoing investigation into issues that involve him.” Then the clincher: “This Office, nonetheless, shall proceed with the probe, as mandated by the Constitution. If the President has nothing to hide, he has nothing to fear.”

But if all she did was issue no-nonsense statements, Morales would not be the commanding authority figure that she is. ...she has a formidable reputation as a lawyer, a sterling career as a justice of the Supreme Court, and an impressive work ethic that has enabled her to dramatically reduce the Ombudsman’s caseload.

...The chair of the Commission on Human Rights, lawyer and Charter framer Chito Gascon, is, like the Ombudsman, someone who has reaped a bitter harvest of presidential abuse because he dares to do his constitutional duty. The public outrage that erupted when a petulant House of Representatives voted to grant the CHR a P1,000 budget was a response in part to the rhetorical beating the President had administered on Gascon; the symbolic sum (about $20) was an insult, a calling of names through other means.

Gascon has stood his ground, and continues to put his agency’s meager budget (since restored) on the frontline of human rights protection.

Other profiles in courage include:

Some members of the Supreme Court, who place duty to the Constitution above loyalty to the President. At a time when pivotal Court rulings are characterized by compromised reasoning, they serve as witnesses to the grand ideal of the law as reason prevailing over force.

Journalists like Maria Ressa, who have worked to “hold the line” against state-sponsored or -inspired attacks on press freedom. The Democracy and Disinformation Conference ongoing at the Ateneo de Manila’s Rockwell campus shows that there are many like her, working closely with bloggers, scholars, and members of civil society.

And Sen. Leila de Lima, who will mark a year in detention next week...in a macho culture that likes to make an example (“sampol,” colloquially), she is the primary proof of what the Duterte administration’s weaponization of the rule of law can achieve. Her letters from jail show her spirit is unbroken, her mind undimmed, her will undaunted.

But these examples (and there are many others) also show the limits of the pushback: little of it is institution-based. Most of it is individual-driven. This is not to say that there are no organizations or movements working to defend the democratic project—I can attest that there are, involving sectors from concerned students to frustrated businessmen...and of course the CHR is an agency and Rappler is an organization—but only that at this stage of the political cycle, much of the burden is borne by individuals. The next stage is collective pushback.

http://opinion.inquirer.net/110997/ph-institutions-pushing-back-2#ixzz56wswlD9u

“SC martial law ruling ‘enables rise of an emboldened authoritarian’ – Leonen”

By Lian Buan

Rappler.com, February 10, 2018

MANILA, Philippines – The recent Supreme Court ruling that upheld the constitutionality of President Rodrigo Duterte's re-extension of martial law in Mindanao “enables the rise of an emboldened authoritarian,” Associate Justice Marvic Leonen said in a strongly worded dissenting opinion.

“Contrary to the text and spirit of the Constitution, the decision in this case provides the environment that enables the rise of an emboldened authoritarian. This is far from the oath to the Constitution that I have taken. I, therefore, dissent,” Leonen said.

https://www.rappler.com/nation/195728-martial-law-leonen-dissenting-opinion-supreme-court?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=nation

Forbearance is silence,

Virtue of the meek.

Silence is complicity,

Oppression of the weak.

https://poetryofgonzalinhodacosta.blogspot.com/2016/07/forbearance-is-silence.html

Philippine democratic institutions under assault by the aspiring dictator Duterte should resist by speaking out in support of Philippine democracy and its strong foundation in the 1987 Constitution.