In your opinion, were Sen. Antonio Trillanes, et al. justified in their 2003 mutiny since they were fighting the government corruption?

Erize Zeale, Metro Manila: No, the end does not justify the means. I particularly cannot accept their using elitist venues like Oakwood and Manila Peninsula to stage their mutiny.

Lucas Banzon Madamba, Laguna: I think Sen. Trillanes, et al. were justified in their quest for freedom from corruption, however, their acts made them victims of circumstances.

A failed power grab plain and simple

Norberto Robles, Taguig City: Putschists all over the globe use government corruption as an excuse to grab power. Trillanes is no exception. Let’s thank our stars for the incompetence of these “coup-als”.

Ruben Velasquez, Manila: It was a just a power grab riding on the unpopular GMA.

Marlon Pielago, Teresa, Rizal: There is no justification for what Trillanes, et al. did. All governments have their own weaknesses but it doesn’t mean that soldiers like him have the right to occupy a hotel and call for people to rise against the government. One thing for sure, they did it out of a wrong assumption na sasamahan sila ng mga tao, kaso walang nagpunta. Pahiya sila.

Rodolfo Talledo, Angeles City: The claim of corruption was a sidetrack gambit they tried to play up when their obsession to grab power was foiled. Only the naive believe the story.

Ric Vergara, Calamba: No, a mistake can never be corrected by committing another mistake. They did it to satisfy their own political ambitions. Mga bantay-salakay.

Ferdinand Rafer, Cavite: They used fighting government corruption as an alibi when they failed to topple the government, but their main objective was a military takeover. Di ba, Kuya?

Ron Mendoza, Manila: What government corruption are they talking about? Gloria Arroyo was President for only more than a year at that time and if memory serves me right, wala pang malaking issue about corruption na nakamantsa sa kanya ng mga panahon na ‘yon. Trillanes and his group of power-hungry armed clowns were not fighting corruption when they took over that five-star hotel, they were trying to steal a government.

Their actions were justified

Louella Brown, Baguio City: I believe that Sen. Trillanes, et al. were justified in their 2003 mutiny. They sacrificed family and career in fighting government corruption.

Armando Tavera, Las Piñas City: In a way, yes. Their grudges were heard. They had enough basis to complain and evidence of corruption is rampant.

Miguelito Herrera, Cabanatuan City :Yes, indeed, Sen. Trillanes is vindicated. The mutiny was justified as a wake-up call for the most corrupt President at the time, but unfortunately, she didn’t listen. This is why Trillanes won the senatorial elections, proving that all their grievances against corruption in government and military cannot be overlooked forever. Welcome back to the Senate, Sen. Trillanes.

Jim Veneracion, Naga City: Naturally, for Sen. Trillanes, et al. were fighting for what is right. Just like the Filipinos of the Edsa ’86 revolution, their acts are justified.

Elpidio Que, Vigan: When Sen. Sonny, et al. staged their Oakwood caper, I abhorred their act for reason that it further weakened our economy. However, as days passed with their incarceration, corruption of the highest form popped out one by one like popcorns. These were more than enough reasons for me to change my mind to say that yes, their Oakwood act, though it turned out futile, were justifiable.

Reynaldo Joaquin, Las Piñas City: The group of Sen. Trillanes justified their unlawful action against their Commander-in-Chief as their grievances were bound to fall on deaf ears and blind eyes.

Deo Durante, Camarines Sur: That move of Sen. Trillanes, et al. were but just in a country like us governed by also hardheaded leaders, self-centered, corrupt, etc. What other means would they need to do aside from mutiny in order to hear their clamor on the so-called rampant crockery in the armed forces? Our government is loud- deaf, they fail to here whisper. Look what happened to the clamored made by the teachers in library standardization, is it not was given in a staggered and installment basis? Because the teachers are so patient, fear and calm-hearted human beings.

Act of treason

Edwin Castillo, Tanauan City: They committed treason against their commander-in-chief. They also betrayed their oath of allegiance to defend the Constitution.

Cris Rivera, Rizal: No, theirs is an act of open rebellion against a legally established authority, subjecting them to a probe by a court marshall.

The end does not justify the means

Ruel Bautista, Laguna: Yes, we are a democratic country but we are governed by laws. The end therefore will never justify the means.

Leonard Villa, Batac City: Simple logic dictates that a good intention being carried out by illegal means can never be justified. Trillanes deserves punishment.

Rey Ibalan, Antipolo City: The end does not justify the means. The 2003 mutiny is simply unconstitutional no matter how noble the objective was.

Rey Onate, Palayan City: No, I believe that Trillanes and his gang are creatures of dirty politics and their mutiny is not and can never be justified. Ang traidor ay traidor.

C.B. Manalastas, Manila: Never! Trillanes should have brought their grievance to the proper forum but instead they violated the law. They don’t deserve amnesty.

Ishmael Calata, Parañaque City: Fighting government corruption is a just cause but the method by then Col. Antonio Trillanes, et al. is overused and one which the people have grown tired about. Without the support of the people and the majority in the military establishment, any group attempting to rise up in arms to stage a coup d’état will be reduced to mere military adventurists, even if they truly have patriotism in their hearts. Now, if Sen. Trillanes could function fully as a Senator of the Republic, may he show that same grit and courage in fighting corruption in our government. Abangan.

Dennis Montealto, Mandaluyong City: The end doesn’t justify the means, so to speak.

Desuel Pardo, Mandaluyong City: The last two People Power uprisings that ousted the sitting President in both cases were justified because they succeeded, but the mutinies mounted after EDSA 1 were not justified because they all failed. The coup in 1986 was not planned. Rather, the people were already agitating for the ouster of the dictator so they supported the military. On the other hand, the people who wanted to oust the plundering President initiated the second, and the military supported them. The next time the military would want to mount an uprising against the administration, they must first have valid reasons and the resounding support of the people, the military and the police, otherwise they are bound to fail and be unjustified.

Renato Taylan, Ilocos Norte: A perceived corruption in government never justifies any group to stage a mutiny. The rule of law must be upheld at all times.

Elmo Cruz, Manila: Fighting corruption in our society should always be in accordance with laws, otherwise no matter how valid the cause of the mutiny, it will never be justified. The legal way they should have done without causing public apprehension and damage to life and property was to file their leave of absence from the service to file charges at the proper court against those they accused of corruption. Even left-leaning extremists are given their right to ventilate their grievances and sentiments in a proper forum. If deviation from the rules of law is justified, our laws and lawful authorities become inutile and anarchy will reign, driving everyone to take the laws into his hands. An admission of Sen. Trillanes of his guilt is necessary in granting him amnesty, which is opposite to the case of Morong 43 where charges were dropped to justify their release that was tantamount to a not-guilty verdict.

A matter of political convenience

Adrian Catral, Quezon City: I could have sympathized with the group of Trillanes had they not resorted to drastic action. His release is only for political convenience. It’s also a lesson for him.

Raymar Gurrea, Bacolod City: I am not happy with the way pardon was granted to Sen. Trillanes, et al. Was the granting of pardon to his group an act of pity or for political convenience?

A brazen act

Mark Gamboa, Metro Manila: The point is, even Trillanes doesn’t approve of his own actions. The excuse ‘We have no other choice’ is unacceptable. Many fine officers who rose from the ranks, had enough sense of honor and statecraft to do the best they could in their capacities as civil servants and military officers. A wrongdoing could never be corrected by doing more damage. Hindi iyon idea ng gobyerno; idea yun ng mga bandido.

Felix Ramento, USA: I would have called it bravery if they had displayed such courage against the enemy. But against their own government, it was pure and simple brazenness.

Rudy Tagimacruz, Malaybalay City, Bukidnon: There are many ways of fighting corruption in government but violence is certainly not the ideal approach.

Jayson Biadog, Mandaluyong City: Seeing Gen. Garcia’s wealth, I believe so, but it should have been aired in media and not through an uprising. We must always believe that the pen is mightier than the sword.

Renato Quioco, Bohol: Trillanes and others’ actions is not justified since they acted like terrorists in occupying a hotel and planting bombs. These people should be punished and not be granted amnesty.

They’ve learned their lesson

Jose Fabello Jr., Cagayan de Oro City: Perhaps they were, but Trillanes, et al. learned their lessons the hard way. To fight the establishment, one must do it through the establishment.

A political ploy

R. Los Banos, Las Pinas City: How could they justify destroying private property for their advocacy? They should have attacked Malacañang whose occupant was their primary target or one of the military camps since they were crying corruption near the top of the military’s leadership. By attacking a defenseless five-star target like Oakwood, Trillanes showed that he was not prepared to die for his cause but had bigger plans and ambitions “a la Gringo”. Apparently, he succeeded.

Ricardo Tolentino, Laoag City: The genuine purpose of the mutiny was tainted when Trillanes and his group ran for public office. They only used the mutiny.

Dennis Vibandor, Camarines Sur: The only problem with giving them amnesty is that it tends to create an impression of permissiveness on military adventurism, which is also sometimes used as free political advertisements especially by mutineers with political ambitions.

Rico Fabello, Parañaque City: I see no difference between Honasan and Trillanes. They both need to sober up.

A bad precedent

Juan Deveraturda, Subic, Zambales: Taking up arms against any legal and duly constituted government and trying to unseat a legitimate government leader through violent and extra-constitutional means is never justified. Democracy is alive in our country. We enjoy freedom of expression and media is free. There are democratic avenues where anyone can air or express his grievances against the government. If our military officers and soldiers have grievances against the government, they should resign from their jobs and then fight the government through legal and peaceful means. The amnesty being offered by the government to Trillanes is a bad precedent. It is tantamount to tolerating the use of violence in addressing complaints and protests against our government. The use of violence in settling issues and problems in a democratic society is never justified. Our country will have no peace. And for military officers who have political ambitions, like Trillanes, the strategy now is “launch a mutiny and become a senator”.

Pedro Alagano Sr., Vigan City: Not at all. Their acts indubitably undermined the rule of law and gravely coerced the duly constituted government to bend on their agenda. They obviously violated existing laws of the land that should be tried and ventilated in a court trial. With their absolution and release by a Presidential amnesty, then expect that they’ll not be the last military adventurists.

Ruben Viray, Antipolo City: As the saying goes, there are more than one ways to skin a cat. Perhaps Sen. Trillanes’ advocacy about corruption in government was acceptable, however, what he did I believe was out of adventurism rather than for the cause. This move is very alarming and might be a bad precedent in the long run. There are about a hundred legal ways to express his thought and opinion. He took advantage of the poor civilian lives and destroyed private property for his own motive. Such adventurism may be considered unbecoming of a true soldier and a gentleman.

They deserve an award

Manuel Abejero, Pangasinan: If I were the President, I would even award them with medals for their brave stand against a thieving president and her family. I would even encourage the military that when a president is doing acts that are illegal and contrary to his/her sworn duty, then they should remind him/her about it in the most respectable manner. This could be done only if Congress will enact a law taking away from the president the power to appoint the Chief of Staff and form instead a Council of Generals and let them vote from among themselves whom they want to be their Chief of Staff.

Double standard

Loi Castillo, Davao City: When then Col. Honasan, et al. staged their own adventure in 1989, he perceived that the government of Cory Aquino was also corrupt. He was pardoned by President FVR even though the misadventure cost the country such big economic losses. Pana-panahon lang yan. In this country, there are always double standards and the laws of this land are not consistent.

Hidden agenda

Robert Young Jr., San Juan: Occupying a hotel in Makati, securing it with mines, and forcing yourselves into an inescapable corner with a bunch of misguided soldiers can hardly be called a mutiny. A bomb could have finished them off in a second. Like previous “coups” participated by Honasan, the Oakland incident was a flop. Yes, corruption was rampant during the Arroyo regime, but the Trillanes group may have used the issue for personal motives. The whole incident could have been staged for 15 minute of fame.

They had no choice

Germi Sison, Cabanatuan City: Legally speaking, they were not justified as there were other ways of fighting corruption in the government without taking the law into their hands. But since their efforts in voicing out their sentiments to the President were ignored, they were left with no other alternative but to force the issue through a mutiny. If they were successful they could have been declared heroes as were FVR, JPE, Honasan and other mutineers in the February 1986 uprising. Since they failed to win the support of the people, they were forced to give up and became offenders of rules and regulations. However, those who knew the corruption in the military and election irregularities consider them as heroes. The recent exposure and discovery of military anomalies are justifying their 2003 mutiny and asking for apology from the past regime is definitely unthinkable.

Ella Arenas, Pangasinan: They were only forced to stage that mutiny to stop corruption in the military committed by the likes of Comptroller Carlos Garcia.

Dr. Jose Balcanao, Benguet: The 2003 mutiny was a social reaction and a wake-up call to rampant corruption in government. It was Sen. Trillanes’ revolutionary way of demanding for reforms in the government bureaucracy.

The fight is not over

Alexander Raquepo, Ilocos Sur: There was corruption, indeed, and it continues to exist. I think their fight is not yet over and many expect a part 2 unless P-Noy and the present military leadership do something about it.

Rose Leobrera, Manila: Sadly, the corrupt - the very reason why Sen. Trillanes, et al. rose up in arms - should be the ones put behind bars, but sadly, they happily remain in high heavens enjoying every bit of glory. However, there are also reports going around about Trillanes misbehaving on funds or something. This needs to be clarified, too.

Views expressed in this section do not necessarily reflect the editorial position of The STAR. The STAR does not knowingly publish false information and may not be held liable for the views of readers exercising their right to free expression. The publication also reserves the right to edit contributions to this section as it sees fit.

NEXT INBOX QUESTION: Do you see anything wrong with P-Noy buying himself a Porsche?