Madame John Quincy Adams?

MANILA, Philippines - The sixth American president, like GMA, was the child of a previous president: John Quincy Adams was son to second president John Adams. After he lost his bid for reelection in 1828 to the populist Andrew Jackson, he bided his time looking for ways to be useful to the young republic, and stood for election in 1830 to the House of Representatives as a candidate from his home state of Massachusetts.

Is there another parallel emerging? We hear that the 14th president of this republic plans to run for election to the Filipino House of Representatives from her home province of Pampanga. Is this a horrific loss of face — to go from Palace to mere Batasan? Well, Adams refused to consider it as such, and as Congressman Adams, in fact, achieved far more than as President Adams. His was the essential and eloquent voice against slavery throughout his 17 years in the House, and he is remembered as one of the preeminent men of principle in the history of American politics. So I guess the parallel has already become dubious.

For we know that Congress is not all that GMA has in mind. Hers has been a relentless search for ways to remain in power, and I haven’t found a single suggestion here in Manila that it is because she so deeply wishes to serve her country. Rather, it is usually suggested, she doesn’t wish to serve it in jail. For with a single page of paper, the department of justice can instigate a search for any properties she or any member of her family may have obtained — even with only a smidgen of evidence — of laundered or otherwise tainted funds.

Here’s what could happen. An unfriendly successor in Malacañang — or just one intent on upholding the law — can authorize the DOJ to empower any investigator abroad to go to a court (say, in San Francisco) with the slightest of proof that a building was so obtained, and the court will in all likelihood freeze the ownership of this house or building, preventing its sale. The investigator can then go to that American court and through a complicated but brief process demand under oath an accounting for all funds used to acquire it (it’s called “discovery” in America).

The resulting bank records, of course, can be used to follow the flow of funds all over the world. One can hide one end of a bank record — but not both ends — and the resulting search can take the investigator all over the world to discover related funds in cut-out companies, holding firms, banks, or any other entity used to acquire properties or equities with illegal monies. The results can be, might well be, devastating.

Globalization has proceeded in international law at a breathtaking pace in recent years. Government ministers can be arrested in any of a number of countries. Israeli ministers do not, for this reason, travel to Belgium, which has “friendly” laws for seizing persona of governments accused of crimes against humanity. Small wonder Robert Mugabe doesn’t travel without previous assurances of legal immunity. The United States kidnapped the Panamanian head of state; a San Francisco court convicted the former prime minister of Ukraine on 27 counts of felony connected with his acquisition of about $40 million of properties in the Bay Area and he has spent quite a time in jail or otherwise restricted there.

Apparently Mrs. Arroyo knows all this. It’s no wonder she wants the protection of high office. But at what cost to the Republic? Her problem though is a different one. A friendly successor can promise her immunity here in the Philippines, but that’s worth nothing abroad. Any properties she or her family hold abroad can be scrutinized for any illegality. As FVR says, it’s time for her to “face the music.”

In this instance, of course, she can avoid travel to the accusing country, but that might be a bit of a problem if she, say for example as prime minister of a newly-formed parliamentary government, wishes to address the United Nations (or enjoy the properties members of her family are known to possess aboard).

Now, John Quincy Adams didn’t have any of these problems. Though his family wasn’t poor — they’d been merchants prior to Father’s presidency — he didn’t have properties abroad or much at home. But he had honor, honor to burn. And his descendants — though two of his sons had painful careers trying to carry family honor — included the great Charles Francis Adams, diplomat and writer, whose namesakes continue to brighten the Boston skyline. And his grandson got riches galore as one of the founders of Raytheon.

There is a parallel with the sixth American president for the 14th Philippines president to consider. She could run for Congress, and of course win, and then serve with honor in the manner that her ample professional qualifications allow her — the macroeconomic record of her presidency is very impressive. She and her family could continue to serve the Philippines in a way that causes no ugly rumors to emerge. One presumes that her financial problems aren’t great; it’s the legal ones that bother her. But if she began anew, let us say in the style of her incorruptible father, she could burnish the golden side of her record impressively — and my guess is that no one would dare challenge her legally. When you have honor on your side, even if it emerges only latterly, foreign courts just aren’t too interested in incarcerating you. They have bigger fish to fry. And the American president would surely then welcome such a person for more than a routine short meeting — it is all too well known that Barack Obama spurned her first several attempts for a meeting simply because of the tarnish that lingers over her presidency.

Eight years ago I wrote that Mrs. Macapagal-Arroyo had an unparalleled opportunity to leave a fantastic legacy, since she almost certainly had most of a decade to do it from Malacañang. It’s never too late to start.

* * *

J. Scott Thompson is Professor Emeritus of International Politics Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy. He currently resides in the Philippines.