|
A LOT of
people are pinning their hopes that the Senate inquiry
into the controversial $329-million national broadband
network deal, which resumes today, would provide the
country that rare opportunity to confront corruption in
this country at its roots and do some wholesale
cleansing.
And yet,
if we are to achieve that, the honorable men and women
who have undertaken the role of probers (senators), the
interested sectors that seek to shape the course of the
inquiry from the sidelines (civil society and church)
and the ones who chronicle everything (the media) should
all, at all times, be focused on ferreting out the
truth, shorn of drama and the hard-to-resist temptation
to mix ego and political intramurals with that difficult
task.
After
two—or three—Edsas, we should have learned certain vital
lessons by now, chiefly, that it is best not to be
stampeded into certain pat conclusions and keep the
focus on what truths need to be pulled out from the
parties involved.
We also
need to draw the line—to borrow a phrase from witness
Rodolfo Noel Lozada Jr.—between praising courage on one
hand and falling into the “Chavit syndrome” on the
other, or turning certain persons, i.e., Lozada and Joey
de Venecia into full-fledged heroes.
It is
clear from his testimony that Lozada had no intention to
testify, or would have delayed it as long as possible,
until that moment he felt his life might be in danger.
That he has admitted some of the questionable acts he
was confronted with at the Senate certainly lent him
credibility, having testified against self-interest, but
it doesn’t mean people should completely ignore gaps in
his testimony, or let him stay silent on details he
might choose to still hide but which are of public
interest.
Another
thing to avoid, if we are to clearly focus on the truth,
are inconsistent voices, including, sadly, those of
certain Church leaders. The pastoral statement of the
Catholic Bishops’ Conference of the Philippines (CBCP)
at its last semestral plenary assembly, before it
weighed in last Sunday on the NBN hearings, had been
weak, even sounding compromised, to many in the flock.
The CBCP
in January refused to blame the Arroyo government of
widespread corruption and even called it a “partner” in
nation-building.
But on
Sunday, challenged perhaps by the role into which a key
Catholic community, that of the La Salle brothers, had
been thrust by recent events, the bishops said the
present unraveling on the NBN inquiry “may yet save our
country from being hostage to scandalous and shady
government deals that offend the common good and serve
only personal, family and group interests.”
The
bishops reiterated the message of their latest pastoral
statement lamenting the absence of social conscience
today as the root cause of “our systematic graft and
corruption.”
With
some of the personalities linked to the deal—and the
side issues as the alleged Lozada abduction—expected to
attend today’s hearing and refute or clarify some of
Lozada’s assertions, the public may yet get a clearer
picture of the issues involved and begin to discern for
themselves the truth behind the whole controversy.
Which, of course, is not easy, given the charges and
countercharges traded so far by the protagonists.
Never in
the past few years has the stake called “truth” borne a
heavy price. Consider the political fallout from the NBN
deal: First, the ouster of House Speaker Jose de Venecia
Jr., whose son, Joey, first revealed details of the
corruption that attended the deal, even as, per Lozada’s
account, Joey himself would have been part of an
“arrangement” had not the unmanageable “greed” of some
parties upset the apple cart.
Second,
the resignation of Comelec chairman Benjamin Abalos Sr.
following the allegation by former National Economic and
Development Authority (Neda) director general Romulo
Neri that he was offered P200 million by Abalos to
approve the deal. Third, the “collateral” damage to the
fine careers of officials who sought to help Lozada get
his wish of delaying his appearance at the Senate, i.e.,
PNP chief Avelino Razon Jr., Environment Secretary Lito
Atienza, and on the sidelines, the talented lawyer
Antonio Bautista, who got dragged into the mess on
account of Neri.
We’re
not even considering yet the institutional damage: to
the Neda, which had been plunged to low depths under
Neri’s helm, losing its esteemed voice in the Cabinet,
and now, as it turns out, having its own chief tap an
outsider like Lozada, with no accountability, to be his
shadow consultant on the NBN.
Another
collateral damage: Lozada himself has resigned from his
job as president of Philippine Forest Corp., an attached
agency of the Department of Environment and Natural
Resources, and now may yet face investigation for some
of the “smaller” sins he admitted at Friday’s hearing.
Malacańang maintains that since the deal has been
scrapped, the Senate should stop its investigation; we
should forget the whole thing and instead focus on the
economy.
But the
real issue here is corruption in the highest reaches of
the government. And where taxpayers’ money is involved,
then the people have every right to demand a clear
answer as to whether wrongdoing has been committed and
who should be made accountable, given estimates that no
less than a fifth of the Philippine government budget
ends up as kickbacks.
Certainly, the stakes in this continuing saga are
tremendous, and therefore those who have taken it upon
themselves to determine the whole truth must avoid any
misstep—either on account of an overweening desire to
grandstand, or a lazy resort to the more obvious, facile
conclusions without validating each claim and
counterclaim, or, the worst of all, the injection of
politics into the task of ferreting out the truth.
It is no
secret that besides the fact several of those in the
limelight have cast a moist eye on 2010, at least three
of the inquisitors have an ongoing, long-drawn battle
with one of those summoned to Monday’s probe, i.e.,
Atienza, in the Liberal Party intramurals. The DENR
secretary, by all means, must testify so he can explain
himself and refute or clarify some of the assertions
made on Friday.
Ditto
PNP chief Razon, who, if he were a party to an
“abduction,” would certainly make for an interesting
subject, because at one point Lozada told Razon, “sorry,
Gen [for General], that you were dragged into this,” or
something to that effect in Filipino. Imagine a victim
apologizing to one of the “culprits” in his abduction!
The hue
and cry raised over the circumstances of Lozada’s
temporary disappearance on Tuesday is understandable,
given the administration’s track record in making
witnesses and suspects disappear, only to surface with
different versions later. And yet, in this whole NBN-ZTE
saga, those truly interested in the truth must not lose
their eye on the ball: who took money while sacrificing
public interest, and to what level was the corruption? |
