|
MAKATI Mayor Jejomar Binay is no saint. No Filipino
politician is, has ever been one, or is likely to be
one.
The
backroom deals, the patronage system and the alliances
of convenience on which the political system thrives
make it impossible. But politicians can and do redeem
themselves despite the compromises they make to reach
their goals. Claro M. Recto fought tenaciously for
Philippine sovereignty, and was most likely assassinated
for it. Benigno Aquino Jr. was certainly assassinated
for serving as a symbol and rallying point of
antimartial law resistance.
Binay
is no Claro M. Recto, and no Ninoy Aquino either. He did
demonstrate more than Malacañang that he was ready to
defend Philippine sovereignty when he made sure on
December 4 that rapist Daniel Smith ended up in the
Makati City Jail.
Binay
has been described as a junior Estrada among other
epithets, and is apparently as determined as your next
trapo to stay in power by making
Makati
his and his family’s exclusive turf.
Neither makes him any better or any worse than most
politicos. But Binay, at least, has been doing the
country a signal service by refusing to curtail freedom
of assembly and free expression in his domain,
transforming it into an island of dissent in a
sea
of
Metro
Manila
repression.
Not
since the martial-law period have these freedoms
mattered most than from 2005 onwards. It was in late
2005 when the Arroyo regime began to curtail these
rights through, among other measures, its “no-permit,
no-rally” and calibrated preemptive response policies.
Both
were gross violations of the Bill of Rights, and both
were meant to prevent citizens from gathering in the
streets and expressing their contempt for an
illegitimate president and the fraud that attended her
bogus election.
Declared illegal by the Commission on Human Rights, the
“no-permit, no-rally” policy has remained in force,
ready to be used against citizens at the whim of
Malacañang and its police lackeys, whose idea of a
calibrated response to anything is to simply bash
people’s heads in.
In an
effort to provide its policy of repression a legal
fig-leaf, as well as to widen its assault on the Bill of
Rights, the regime declared a state of national
emergency in February 2006, inaugurating it with the
violent dispersal of demonstrations and the arrest of
their leaders, a raid on the offices of the newspaper
The Daily Tribune, the filing of sedition charges
against Party-list representatives, and the detention,
still continuing, of Anak Pawis Party-list Rep. Crispin
Beltran.
The
regime then seized upon constitutional amendments not
only as a means of keeping itself in power until 2010,
at least, but also to dismantle the libertarian legacies
of Edsa 1 as these have been enshrined in the 1987
Constitution. Meanwhile, the killing of political
activists accelerated from its already horrendous 2003
levels, while the killing of journalists continued,
abetted by government indifference.
The
aggressive and sustained regime efforts to suppress
constitutionally guaranteed rights in order to guarantee
its survival and dominance is the context in which Binay
encouraged and continues to encourage protest in Makati,
whatever his motives may be.
It is
for being both head of the United Opposition (UNO), as
well as for encouraging protests in
Makati,
that Binay has become Malacañang’s prime target among
all opposition mayors. The Department of the Interior
and Local Government (DILG) thus ordered his suspension
in October. The DILG investigated the four complaints
against him only AFTER Binay had obtained a temporary
restraining order against the implementation of its
order.
Having failed in that effort, Malacañang is fielding
Sen. Lito Lapid against Binay this May. Not knowing any
better, and apparently unaware of Article III Section 4
of the 1987 Constitution which guarantees the right to
free expression and assembly, Lapid has openly declared
that his main intention in running for Makati mayor is
to stop protests.
“Makati is a center of business and protest rallies have
no place in that city because these affect economic
progress,” Lapid said in an interview in which he
explained why he wants to be mayor of Makati.
Mr.
Lapid should go out more, or—if it’s at all
possible—should read more on the current sentiments of
Makati
residents. There are many yuppies who look at protests
as undue inconveniences in their petty lives. But much
of the business community based in Makati has expressed
alarm over political killings, which at least suggests
that it welcomes efforts to stop them—such as, for
example, through the protests Mr. Lapid would stop
instead, presumably through the use of police violence.
Mr.
Lapid has so far not said what else he intends to do if
and when he becomes Makati mayor. That’s not a remote,
but a distinct, possibility given all the advantages Mr.
Lapid has. Among these are the flood of money from the
Palace that’s likely to inundate the country like a
tsunami, armed forces and police politicking, his
celebrity status, and, last but certainly not the least,
the fabled innumeracy of the Commission on Elections.
All will be driven by the absolute determination of the
current Malacañang occupier to throw Binay out of city
hall.
About
what’s really at stake in
Makati,
Mr. Lapid is probably as clueless as he is about his
platform of government. The residents of Makati
shouldn’t be.
Comments? Contact the author at teodoro@ info.com.ph.
For other columns and comments: www.luisteodoro.com. |
