‘To the streets’
Dinky: Edsa 1, 2, 3 forces now united against Gloria
------------------------------
THOUSANDS took the campaign to oust President Arroyo to the streets yesterday after the House of Representatives rejected an attempt to impeach for election fraud and graft.
Led by "people power" icon President Corazon Aquino and Susan Roces, the widow of Fernando Poe Jr., they marched to the Batasan building in Quezon City, chanting "Gloria resign!" after the opposition failed to gather the one-third or 79 signatories it needed to keep its hope of impeaching Arroyo alive.
They were joined by Sen. Panfilo Lacson and Eddie Villanueva, who both ran for president in 2004.
The opposition, which accused Arroyo of bribing lawmakers to secure their votes, said it will also ask the Supreme Court to look into Congress’ handling of the impeachment process.
"The search for truth is not yet over, the President and her allies will be haunted by the accusations," minority leader Francis Escudero said.
Convenors of the Bukluran Para sa Katotohanan, a broad alliance of groups seeking the removal of Arroyo, said they will meet the rejection of the impeachment complaint with bigger street protests.
Villanueva, head of the Jesus Is Lord Movement, said they gave the constitutional process a chance but the administration used the tyranny of numbers to suppress the people’s desire to know the truth.
"Kaming lahat ay patuloy na umaasa at patuloy na makikipaglaban ng mapayapa. Huwag naman sanang dumanak ang dugo," Villanueva said in his homily near the flagpole in front of the Session Hall main entrance.
Former Welfare Secretary Dinky Soliman predicted bigger demonstrations.
"Marami ang nagsasabi hindi daw ito mangyayari, di raw namin kakayanin. Nagkakamali sila. Dahil sa pagpatay nila sa impeachment complaint, mas marami ang kikilos at ipipilit na ilabas ang katotohanan," she said.
Asked to address a statement to the President, Soliman said: "Ma’am, nagkakaisa na po ang mga tao. May I remind you of the 10th agenda of your administration – reconciliation. Nandito na po, nag-reconcile na ang EDSA 1, 2, at 3. Dapat bumaba na kayo para umusad na tayo."
JB Baylon, who I believe voted for Arroyo in the 2004 elections, said this:
AND so it came to pass that the majority in the House of Representatives voted to finally kill the proceedings to impeach the President of the Philippines and transmit articles of impeachment to the Senate for proper trial.
Why must this bother us? Because the move prevents all of us from getting to the truth of the matters alleged against the President — including conniving with an election official to cheat in the 2004 elections and using government funds to achieve that purpose.
To think that it was the President herself who asked — or was it dared — her critics to bring her case to the House of Representatives. Was it because she knew what fate awaited the complaints?
Whatever the reason for that braggadocio, it may be misplaced because while the vote succeeded in the thrashing of the impeachment complaints against the President — at least the 2005 versions — it did not succeed in ferreting out the truth. Which is what millions of Filipinos want to see happen, whether or not they actually want to see the President go!
On this point President Fidel Ramos, erstwhile savior of the Arroyo administration, was correct: A vote to kill the impeachment will not settle the issues. So many questions remain unanswered — the same questions that were raised at the beginning of the impeachment proceedings.
He also said that there are so many questions that are left unanswered:
Where is Garcillano? As pointed out by Rep. Gilbert Remulla, how can someone of his stature (should that have been "notoriety"?) have been able to give our authorities the slip? How could he have appeared in Singapore — as confirmed by the Government of Singapore itself, an independent, uninterested party — without the knowledge of local authorities?
Rep. Butch Pichay likes to point out that, until recently, Garcillano was an ordinary citizen against whom no charges had been filed. If so, why did he have to slip away like a thief in the night? And who made it possible? And why? And what consequences should those who made this happen, whether by commission or omission, face?
Were the voices indeed those of the President and Garcillano? If so, were the topics of their conversations proper? Or criminal? Why, for example, did the President not react when Garcillano hinted at using kidnapping to help silence an election official? Why was she so interested in whether or not Garcillano indeed had taken custody of this official? Why did she not react when he spoke of "yung ginawa naming pagpapataas sa inyo…".
And if the voices were those of the President and Garcillano, why shouldn’t presidential spokesman Ignacio Bunye be charged with obstruction of justice, and even disbarred? Why shouldn’t environment secretary Mike Defensor be charged with a similar offense due to his attempts to be a hero for the President by dabbing into electronic technology in an attempt to confuse the issue?
And why shouldn’t foreign affairs secretary Alberto Romulo be charged with dereliction of duty — for apparently not doing anything to find Garcillano, not begging the help of our neighbors and friends to help shed light on the whereabouts of one man who, in turn, could shed so much light on the crisis that envelope the presidency of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo? Or is Romulo himself treading that line that is oh-so-close to obstruction of justice?
So many questions that will, apparently, remain unanswered because the majority in the House of Representatives have seen it fit to vote to kill the impeachment proceedings against Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.
Where do we turn now for answers? What must we do to find the truth?
Maybe the only way we will get to the bottom of this is after Arroyo is already gone.
Neal Cruz on how quickly the pro-Arroyo allies in the House killed all three imepeachment complaints and why:
IT WAS a chance for congressmen to be great, but they chose to be greedy instead. They could have opted for the truth that the nation has been asking, ended the uncertainty and disbelief of an entire nation, but they chose money instead like true mercenaries.
In the lowest point of the history of the House of Representatives, gleeful and gloating congressmen like true movie villains murdered the impeachment complaint against President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. It did it in record time, too, like an express train. While the House always took many months, sometimes going beyond the deadline, to do its most important function -- the enactment of a budget -- it took only a couple of days to permanently kill the impeachment complaint. The House had 60 days to decide whether or not to impeach the President. It had used up only 14 of those 60 days. It had 46 days left. Yet it rushed the voting on such an important undertaking, working the whole night straight to the morning after to hammer the last nail on the coffin of democracy in the Philippines.
What was the hurry? The President is going to the United Nations and she wants to be able to boast there that there is no more impeachment threat hanging over her head. Never mind if her constituents back home hate her so much they wish she wouldn’t come back anymore, how she looks like to foreigners is more important to her.
So the marching order to her mercenaries in the House was to kill the impeachment case before her trip, perhaps with a bonus if they did it in record time.
So the Filipino nation will never know the truth. Who is its rightful president? Who won in the last presidential elections, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo or Fernando Poe Jr.? Did Ms Arroyo cheat? Is she a usurper and an impostor?
The nation would have been better served had the representatives of the people, who had overwhelmingly expressed their opinion in surveys that they want to know the truth, sent the case to the Senate for trial. After all, impeaching the President doesn’t mean she would be ousted. It would merely allow both sides to present their evidence so that the Senate can judge it fairly. Ms Arroyo will be given her day in court as she wants.
“Impeach me! Give me my day in court so I can defend myself. Follow the rule of law,” she challenged the opposition. Then she can prove her innocence, that she won “fair and square” as she claims. And that’s what the opposition tried to do: Impeach her, follow the rule of law.
But instead of seeking the truth, the House decided to kill the complaint so no evidence could be presented. The people will now be forever in doubt. Are we being ruled by a pretender? Do we have a fake president?
Does Ms Arroyo really want to be impeached so she can defend herself? I don’t think so. I think her dare to the opposition to impeach her is just one more lie, like the many others before it. I think she is really afraid to let the evidence come out.
Why has she not bothered to answer the charges against her, to enlighten her people? Why has she chosen to remain silent instead all this time? Why is she afraid of the truth?
Silence is the refuge of the guilty.
Send away gift yan ng mga kakampi ni Arroyo before she leaves for the UN.
From the tribune:
Arroyo: Zero credibility, no right to speak before UN
By Michaela P. del Callar
Wednesday, 09 07, 2005
Barely a week before the President addresses the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) in New York, a civil society leader yesterday said Mrs. Arroyo has no credibility to speak before the world body as her presidency is in question.
Former National Treasurer Leonor Briones, during a forum on the 2005 Millennium Summit Agenda, also criticized the Philippine Millennium Development Goal (MDG) report to be presented this month during the 60th UN General Assembly in New York.
“All these developments cannot help but impact on the MDG since the credibility of the President and her capacity to govern are now seriously questioned,” Briones told an audience of diplomats, academicians, government officials, media and civil society representatives at the New World Hotel in Makati City.
At tignan mo naman ang kalokohan ng mga ilan sa mga pro-Arroyo congressmen:
The beauty of a democracy is indeed the opportunity it offers for the people to kick the rascals out at regular intervals fixed by the Constitution. But when stealing elections has been perfected into an art, what do people do?
During the deliberations of the House committee on justice on the sufficiency in substance of the Lozano complaint, pro-Gloria congressmen developed a bizarre idea of how to rob the people of their right to vote and to get away with it.
It went like this: Assuming Gloria indeed conspired with Garci in doctoring the results of the election, the acts took place before Gloria’s inaugural on June 30, 2004. Impeachment, however, covers only acts committed during an official’s term of office. Ergo, Gloria cannot be impeached on the ground of stealing the election. She may be liable for violations of the Election Code, but indicting her for such offenses can only take place after her term because the president is immune from suits.
The implication is that one can lie, cheat and steal to gain the presidency. Victory ensures one of immunity for six years. Under the twisted impeachment rules of the House, the victor can even merrily go on lying, cheating and stealing, provided he can find a Lozano to file and a Marcoleta to endorse a whimsical impeachment complaint every year he is in office.
If this is the rule of law and of constitutional processes, then the people should not only march in the streets. They should start erecting and manning the barricades
And Robert Mayer of Publius Pundit comments on the Post-Impeachment situation.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment