PARDON ME

There's The Rub
PARDON ME
By Conrado de Quiros
Inquirer
Last updated 01:08am (Mla time) 07/03/2007

Eduardo Ermita says his boss plans to give amnesty to all enemies of the state. The idea, originally conceived by the mind of Yoda -- or his look-alike, not his think-alike, Jose de Venecia -- has become full-blown in the mind of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. (I am using “mind” liberally.) It is part of the peace process that Arroyo is initiating in line with her desire to leave a legacy to the nation, says Ermita. It hews to the amnesty proclamations of Corazon Aquino and Fidel Ramos. “In due time, the amnesty proclamation will be considered by the President.”

That is all very well, except for one thing. Cory and Ramos were the presidents of the Republic of the Philippines; Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo is not.

The question is not: Should Arroyo pardon Antonio Trillanes and Satur Ocampo’s friends in the hills? The question is: Should Juan de la Cruz pardon Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo?

Largeness of spirit is not the concept that strikes you when Ermita talks about pardoning the enemies of the state on behalf of Arroyo. Presumption is. The image I get is that of Ferdinand Marcos doing exactly the same thing. The problem there is not just the word “enemies,” it is the word “state.” In Marcos’ time, the definition of the “enemies of the state” was the “enemies of Marcos,” the unholy equation being that Marcos was the state. Arroyo seems to believe that, too. It is a tyrant’s favorite conceit.

At least when Louis XIV proclaimed “L’etat c’est moi, (I am the state),” he was the rightful king. Marcos and Arroyo are merely errant -- and arrant -- pretenders.

What galled about Marcos’ notion of pardoning the “enemies of the state” was that he wasn’t even a legitimate instrument of the state, he merely seized the state with martial law. What galls about Arroyo’s notion of pardoning the “enemies of the state” is that she isn’t even a legitimate instrument of the state, she merely seized the state with “Hello Garci.” Marcos had no business pardoning anybody, Arroyo has no business pardoning anybody.

I grant Trillanes does need pardoning -- by a duly constituted authority. His crime precisely was rebelling against one. Arroyo was the duly constituted authority during the Oakwood mutiny, notwithstanding that the Joseph Estrada hordes refuse to accept that. The people had spoken against Estrada at the Edsa highway, in the same way that the voters spoke for Trillanes in the last elections. I recognized Arroyo as my president at the time. I might not have liked her, I might have distrusted her -- for crying out loud, and I say that to the people who eventually turned against her, wasn’t the ambition patent from the start? -- but I recognized her authority. I did not like Estrada either, but I recognized his authority when he was president. Both carried the mandate of the people.

Certainly, I diligently paid my taxes throughout that time. I refuse to pay my taxes after the “Hello Garci” tape, and truly mind it that they are exacted from me anyway in the form of withholding tax and value-added tax. I acknowledge my duty to pay taxes to a duly constituted authority. This government is not a duly constituted authority.

But to go back, Trillanes does need a pardon for his mutiny to fully put that past behind him. But the ones who mounted whatever they call it -- a coup, a withdrawal of support, another round of people power, a desperate frustrated attempt to get rid of someone who shouldn’t be there—after the “Hello Garci” tape, they do not need a pardon, they need a medal. Certainly, Francisco Gudani and Alexander Balutan do not need a pardon, they need a medal. Certainly, Danny Lim and Ariel Querubin do not need a pardon, they need their freedom. They did not mount a coup, they tried to end one.

The one who needs pardoning, though the least likely to get it, is not Trillanes, it is Arroyo. Trillanes merely tried to seize power with a mutiny, and though he might have been well intentioned, his means remains questionable. Arroyo did seize power with an atrocity -- “Hello Garci” is, by and of itself, a coup d’état, no more and no less than all the ones the RAM group attempted against Cory -- and there is no question about her intentions: they were selfish. “Hello Garci” is a lapse of judgment only in the same way that plagiarism is an oversight. They are nothing of the kind: the one is the ultimate crime of a president, the other of a writer.

Ermita’s stated reason for Arroyo’s plan to pardon the “enemies of the state” is to reconcile the warring factions and bring unity and peace to the land. Well, contrary to rumor or popular belief, Filipinos do not really have problems uniting. Not when confronted by a common threat. We had no problem uniting against Marcos, and we had no problem uniting against Estrada. As the last elections show, or indeed as the popularity of the rebellions, or the figures associated with those rebellions, show, we have no problem as well uniting against Gloria.

Nor do we have any problem reconciling with one another. We simply have problems reconciling ourselves with illegitimacy, whether as the product of a union with the sacrament of marriage, or as the product of the occupation of office without the sacrament of the vote. She did get it the first time around, during Rizal Day, when she vowed not to run: Let us all do as Rizal did, and think of the nation first before self. She follows her advice and leaves, and overnight this country will be more united than anything glued by epoxy, and peace and harmony will swiftly descend upon the land.

The question is not: Should Arroyo pardon the “enemies of the state”? The question is: Should Juan de la Cruz pardon Arroyo?

Well, as Jaime Cardinal Sin used to say during Cory’s time, pardon is contingent on contrition and penitence. You are not contrite or penitent when you say, “I … am … sorry,” and punish yourself by having more and more power.