|
Being
the first public official who stood up against the
former President on the issue of corruption and abuse of
power, disobeying and then exposing his unlawful
commands and directives, which eventually led to his
impeachment and ouster from office, I am glad that the
trial of Joseph E. Estrada for plunder is now over.
Since
the much-awaited verdict of the Sandiganbayan came down,
I received numerous messages from friends—who were aware
of the difficult times I went through risking my life
and the safety of my family in proclaiming the truth
against President Estrada—essentially asking me whether
I felt relieved and perhaps enjoying a sense of triumph
that justice and the rule of law has prevailed with the
Court’s decision.
But far
from enjoying a sense of satisfaction, I have serious
doubts that justice has triumphed and the rule of law
has prevailed in this case.
As to
whether or not Mr. Estrada considers the Court’s
decision to be just is a matter that he and his
high-caliber panel of lawyers must evaluate under the
umbrella of options available to him: to reconsider the
decision of the Sandiganbayan, to appeal to the Supreme
Court, accept a pardon if granted to him by the
incumbent President, or last but not the least, bravely
face the consequences of his conviction.
While I
pray that the former President will find the justice he
deserves, I seek justice for the Filipino people, the
real victims of the devastating effects of large-scale
corruption, which continue to be ruthlessly perpetrated
and for which there seem to be no end.
The
Sandiganbayan refers to the hundreds of millions of
pesos as “mind-boggling” sums received by Erap as
commissions from ”jueteng lords” in return for the
protection of their illegal-gambling operations.
Yet,
this amount pales in comparison with the P3 billion
reported to have been received by President Estrada for
the sale of PLDT shares to facilitate the disregard of
our securities law and the disclosure rules of the
Securities and Exchange Commission less than two months
after he assumed office.
Why was
there no interest in investigating and prosecuting the
former President for this very serious offense, when
there is no dispute that the sale brokered by Estrada’s
former adviser and financial genius, Mark Jimenez, took
place?
Besides,
the paper trail of the stock purchase could have easily
proven whether or not “the more mind-boggling” sums of
commissions were paid.
Was it
because prominent members of the business community and
other influential personalities now close to the powers
that be might have also been involved?
Why has
not the former President been investigated and
prosecuted for his involvement as a principal player in
the biggest stock-market fraud in our history, known as
the “BW Scandal,” which caused the virtual collapse of
the Philippine Stock Exchange? Could it be because we
want the other big fish routinely involved in insider
trading and stock manipulation to get away in exchange
for political favors?
Unless
we have the will to confront the causes why the
Philippines lags far behind our more progressive Asian
neighbors and learn instructive lessons from these
causes, we can never be liberated from our mistakes or
take off from our underdevelopment.
Many
Erap supporters have protested that his conviction was
politically motivated, and yet, our being fearfully
selective in prosecuting him for crimes committed while
in office does not uphold the rule of law and only lends
credence to such protests.
While I
believe that the conviction of Erap would be impossible
without convincing evidence beyond reasonable doubt, we
could not deny the fact that the trial stems from the
political motivation of his impeachment and removal from
office. And should Erap’s fate end in pardon granted by
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo for the sake of
national unity, then his freedom and relief from the
punishment for plunder would also be politically
motivated.
Seen in
this light, it is evident that the verdict on the former
President has not produced the spark that would have
rekindled the flame of justice that has long died out in
the hearts of many Filipinos.
For the
rule of law to prevail, the law must be uniformly
applied to all, regardless of social status. Anyone who
acts above the law loses any moral authority to invoke
the rule of law in justifying the curtailment of the
legitimate protests of the real victims, who still
suffer in anguish and desperation as a result of the
continued abuse of power by the highest officials of the
land.
Indeed,
our graft laws are made primarily to protect the people
from abuses of those in power. Therefore, the welfare of
the people, which is the supreme law, must rule.
****
Yasay received the Edsa People Power Freedom Award for
Undaunted Courage as a key witness in the impeachment
trial of President Estrada, and is currently a visiting
professor of law at the Richardson School Of Law,
University of Hawaii, in Honolulu. |
