Left Flank

Attempting to follow the constitutional struggles between RP President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the Senate, and the Supreme Court is like witnessing a family feud where no one can recall the genesis of the dispute, but everyone is certain their escalating barbarity will keep the family together.

The Senate rejected Wednesday a Supreme Court proposal which, while allowing former Socioeconomic and Planning Secretary Romulo Neri to testify at the upper chamber's broadband investigation, barred senators from asking questions involving Neri's conversation with President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

After the caucus among the senators, which lasted a couple of hours, Senate President Manuel Villar said most senators believed that the proposal would diminish the powers of the Senate to call any witness or resource person to an inquiry, or to ask certain questions.

«We strongly feel about this…We are doing this not only for us but for future senators,» he said in Filipino.

Villar said: «We cannot agree to a compromise. We reached a consensus to reject the offer. I am really against that because it would show the Senate has no balls, we don't want to look like we're being trampled on.»

As much as I respect Manuel L. Quezon III's opinion on the NBN-ZTE scandal, it seems other Filipino voices have lost faith in the "family", the government, and also have lost faith in their role to exert extra-constitutional pressure on the government through the hackneyed device of a popular revolt. Lest I sound like the NDF, let's take some radical thoughts to heart:

Clearly there is nothing wrong with the Filipino. What is wrong is this nebulous, amorphous "system." I hadn't thought of it before, and previously it had no name. The system is our public life - how we behave in public spaces. What I meant by "civilising" Philippine politics is the creation of civility in our society - the lack of this feeling that we need to eat or be eaten. That we can let go of our guard and live relatively safe lives in public because we have trust that public institutions will work for (more or less) the majority. Isn't this what we mean by justice?

Seriously, I find a lot that's notable in Benjamin de la Pena's Design of Our Democracy and these critical comments.

This revision of the Micro-ocracy proposal (which I shall now call the Micro-Federal Democratic System), seeks to alleviate the following problems: eliminate the Manila monopoly, as since the Congressional vote is province-wise, and the Manila area is one province, it is only the national government capital, but not the economic and social one; avoid a «Serbian mistake», by making sure that no one region or ethnic group has the majority in provincial council vote. Incidentally, AHYH made sure that the «one-man autocracies» would diminish, as the one-man offices are taken from Councils: district, provincial, and then Congressional. Most importantly, no one faction has power. Not the media oligopolies, or the election barons. The elite would be regionally limited. And because, hopefully, secessionist and ideological rebellions would finally be discouraged by giving them a piece of government, military spending would decrease, and the budget would focus on better things, like education, and alternative fuel research, and medicine.

Again, this is just another proposal, coming from one proposal. I am encouraging criticism from various sectors, and their own offers of revisions. In this way, through constructive argument, and the sharing of opinions, we would finally be able to get to a working manual, something that we can thrust on the oligarchs and their elected monarchy and say—this is what it's all about. Not personalities, and not parties. A real, substantial, structural reform, different from the American, different from the Marxist. One that is a balance of the two. And, hopefully, one that works.

But, beware the Philippine version of the politics of "The Wire".