|
SO
what’s wrong with the President taking time to hobnob
with the global CEOs or top executives of multinational
firms? That was the retort of Palace officials to fresh
revelations of sightings of President Arroyo and her
husband in Shenzen on a private golf course owned
by—drum roll—the Chinese telecom giant ZTE Co. Yes, the
ZTE of the aborted national broadband network (NBN) deal
that stirred a hornet’s nest and engaged the country for
several weeks.
The retort was triggered by the usual
critics’ demand for an explanation from the President—an
explanation that, sadly, was botched by the inconsistent
statements of some of her closest subordinates. In the
end, Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita gave the final
explanation, admitting the presence of the First Couple
in the ZTE-owned golf course that had earlier been
denied.
Mrs. Arroyo was in Shenzen for a private
trip in 2006, at the tail end of an official engagement,
but there was no secret meeting directly connected to
the NBN with Chinese state firm ZTE Co.
The trip to Shenzen, for a golf game
that included her husband, Jose Miguel, and then-Speaker
Jose de Venecia Jr., was never hidden from the public,
added Mr. Ermita. “It was a social activity by the
President. That is not being denied. . . . We are
confirming that the President was there. It was not a
secret meeting.”
Mrs. Arroyo went to Shenzen as part of
her eight-day working visit to China and Hong Kong from
October 27 to November 3, 2006. Mrs. Arroyo took a
two-hour ride from
Hong Kong to Shenzen on November 2.
“There’s nothing to hide. Everything is
very transparent. The [former] Speaker was there all
along the whole day they were there in Shenzen,” Ermita
said, and he doubted whether any details of the ZTE deal
could have been forged over a “social lunch” attended by
many people.
Indeed, the new “witness” who came out
with the photos is not likely to have any strong proof
that any deal was talked about, unless he secretly
tape-recorded the conversations. But then, that would be
illegal evidence. Besides, the challenge hurled to the
new witness to send the pictures to court as evidence in
a “case” is hollow, since, as everyone knows, a sitting
president is immune from suit.
So what could be the outcome of this
fresh revelation? From the opposition side, maybe more
fodder when they revive impeachment proceedings against
Mrs. Arroyo once the Pulido case lapses; but from the
public’s point of view, the new revelations, while
circumstantial, provide yet another reason to be
skeptical of official pronouncements and motivations,
mainly because the Palace didn’t come clean on this one.
Secretary Ermita saw no impropriety in
the supposed visit of Mrs. Arroyo to the headquarters of
a potential government supplier, as she has been meeting
left and right with potential investors. “Do we have to
question the President’s meeting with the chairman and
CEO of Hanjin or Texas Instruments? Should we also
question her meeting with Teletech and Intel when the
President went to Davos? These are normal activities. It
is just given color because it is ZTE, which is very
high in the totem pole,” Ermita said.
He has a point, in that it is the
President’s prerogative, nay, duty, to meet with parties
that could be of potential benefit to the country,
either because they have businesses here that they wish
to expand or are planning to make a stake. However, the
difference is that all of the meetings with the CEOs
cited as example were done in official capacity, on
official time and in venues that may, though some of
them were outside Malacańang Palace, be considered
official, such as the sidelines of the Davos World
Economic Forum or some such gathering. If the President
were to travel and stay, in private capacity—so private
it was taken out of her official schedule and out of
reporters’ coverage, as what happened in Shenzen—in the
villa of, say, a global CEO, it would raise eyebrows if
it came at a time when the multinational company
concerned was looking to get a potential contract or
favor.
Mrs. Arroyo, to her credit, is such a
hard worker she has always taken time to meet the likes
of the heads of global concerns like Coke, Dell, Texas
Instruments, Intel, Teletech or Hanjin. That special
touch is important to foreign business because it is
seen as a signal of some personal guarantee, by the
Philippines’ “CEO,” no less, that the business and
regulatory environment here would be fair and stable and
conducive to growth.
But when certain meetings are shrouded
in secrecy, then they become counterproductive and,
instead of a personal guarantee of a good business
environment, doubts arise, instead, about whether there
is a level playing field.
Worse, as in the case of ZTE that was so
hounded by speculations, the investors concerned end up
burned—so badly they wouldn’t dream of touching any
Philippine project again with a 10-foot pole.
The simple, lazy afternoon playing golf
should have meant nothing, indeed, if it were not cast
in the circumstances in which the NBN-ZTE deal had taken
place. The original sin, the Palace must learn, is the
lack of transparency. Everything else could have been
explained, but the doubt was planted by the secrecy. We
hope this serves a lesson, as well, for other
businessmen and business groups that wish to have
personal dealings with the Palace. It doesn’t help to
get entangled in Shenzen-like episodes, so the least
they should strive for is to make everything open. |
