“I am among those who never agreed that this was the proper thing to do or that Gloria was properly installed according to our traditions and our constitutions. It’s nice to know that the Church is finally seeing things my way.”
by Ducky Paredes
I take it as wonderful news that the Church (meaning the Catholic Church which is the only significant Church in the country) will keep a hands-off policy on political movements and will never again lead another People Power revolt. The Church, according to Manila Archdiocese vice chancellor Fr. Sid Marinay, admits that it made a mistake when it took a lead position in Edsa Dos, which installed President Arroyo.
According to Mariinay, the “post-Sin” era marks the end of the Philippine Catholic Church’s political activism; now, the concern of the Church is the strengthening of the political structure. The Church is still in politics but will no longer try to influence us on who should lead the country.
You will remember that the late Manila Archbishop Jaime Cardinal Sin called on the people to mass on the streets during the People Power revolt that ousted former President Ferdinand Marcos in 1986. Then, in 2000, he encouraged the Edsa 2 military-backed putsch that removed popularly elected former President Joseph Estrada and installed Gloria Arroyo into the presidency, all contrary to law..
According to Marinay, the current direction of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP) would strengthen political institutions to solve and prevent political crises. This is somewhat in atonement for what the Bishops did in Edsa II which, as a result, weakened existing political institutions because the Church encouraged the people not to wait for the verdict of the Senator-Judges in the impeachment case against President Estrada. The fear then must have been that the Senators would fail to impeach Erap
CBCP president Archbishop Angel Lagdameo last January said that the church-backed Edsa II was a mistake as the installation of then Vice President Gloria Arroyo as president was merely going from the frying pan into the fire.
“It did not respect the rule of law. It did not give the duly instituted political institution a chance to assert itself and prove its strength to handle such a political turmoil”, wrote Marinay in his paper “The Contemporary Brand of Political Activism of the Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP): Strengthening Political Structures to Solve and Prevent Political Crises.”
“The parliament of the streets, also known as mob rule instrumental in the ouster of Erap Estrada was a shortcut to achieve political change. It was counterproductive, for it weakened our political structures.
“The CBCP statements from the year 2004 to 2008 showed the end of the era of the CBCP’s political activism, in the sense of organizing rallies, that has blurred the line separating the Church and the State. The era of political activism faded away with the passing away of Cardinal Sin,” Marinay writes.
On January 27, 2008, the CBCP issued a statement titled, “Reform Yourselves and Believe in the Gospel” in which Marinay said “the CBCP remained almost unperturbed, long on moral generalizations and short on specific political moves. In spite of the hopelessness of the situation, the CBCP did not encourage the parliament of the streets or rallies.”
“We have always put the blame on people we have chosen to govern us. Today we have become more aware that despite efforts, successful or not, to remove the incompetent or corrupt, our problems have remained. We have looked at the enemy as only outside of us,” Marinay quoted from the CBCP statement.
Says Marinay: “I argue that the CBCP statements issued from 2004 to 2008 can only be properly understood on the pretext of the CBCP’s emphasis on strengthening political structures and institutions.”
Is the Church now repudiating the political activism of Cardinal Sin who even ignored the Pope when Rome told Sin to tone down his rhetoric? Even if this is not what the Church is now doing, the acceptance that they made a mistake with Edsa II is a big step in the right direction.
Now. Perhaps, the Church should encourage all of those who followed the bishops in Edsa Dos to also reflect on their own mistakes when they blindly followed their bishops and the priests and nuns thus, violating the constitution, our democratic institutions and good sense when they booted out the legal president and installed one who not only was illegally installed, she also turned out to be worse than Erap, which the Edsa Dos movers thought they were solving with the installation of a vice president.
I am among those who never agreed that this was the proper thing to do or that Gloria was properly installed according to our traditions and our constitutions. It’s nice to know that the Church is finally seeing things my way.
* * *
The following is from Article two of The New Central Bank Act (R.A. 7653): “SECTION 6. Composition of the Monetary Board. — The powers and functions of the Bangko Sentral shall be exercised by the Bangko Sentral Monetary Board, hereafter referred to as the Monetary Board, composed of seven (7) members appointed by the President of the Philippines for a term of six (6) years.
“The seven (7) members are:
“(a) the Governor of the Bangko Sentral, who shall be the Chairman of the Monetary Board. The Governor of the Bangko Sentral shall be head of a department and his appointment shall be subject to confirmation by the Commission on Appointments. Whenever the Governor is unable to attend a meeting of the Board, he shall designate a Deputy Governor to act as his alternate: Provided, That in such event, the Monetary Board shall designate one of its members as acting Chairman;
“(b) a member of the Cabinet to be designated by the President of the Philippines. Whenever the designated Cabinet Member is unable to attend a meeting of the Board, he shall designate an Undersecretary in his Department to attend as his alternate; and
“(c) five (5) members who shall come from the private sector, all of whom shall serve full-time: Provided, however, That of the members first appointed under the provisions of this subsection, three (3) shall have a term of six (6) years, and the other two (2), three (3) years.
“No member of the Monetary Board may be reappointed more than once.”
The latest appointee to the Monetary Board, who starts today, was a sitting cabinet member at the time of his appointment and continues to be a senior adviser on information matters to the President. So, how can be be appointed as among the five who are supposed to “come from the private sector” and are supposed to “serve full-time”?
Of course, this is not the first time that this appointing power has grossly violated the laws of the land. There was a time when we had more commissioners than were allowed by law in the Bureau of Immigration. An appointee to the Justice and Bar Council (JBC) who was supposed to come from the private sector also came directly from the Sandiganbayan.
Why do we have laws, if the President herself will violate them? Worse, no one even seems to notice.
I wonder if anyone in the Senate or the House will even take this up? Will any lawyer go to the Supreme Court about this? If no one will, let’s do away with that law. Having created the precedent, without raising any protests, the President has made that provision practically inoperable.
# # # #
hvp 06.16.08)
Post a Comment