New politics: Presidency is not for amassing megafortune - FROM A DISTANCE by Carmen N. Pedrosa

Why Erap does not want to resign. Erap does not want to resign because he thinks in this country he can get away with murder, literally and figuratively. This is the Philippines, where abuse in public office goes unpunished. What more if the public office concerned is the presidency, the highest and most powerful office in the land? He figures that others, particularly former President and military dictator Ferdinand Marcos got away with billions stashed in Swiss banks and dozens of properties here and abroad. I remember that in one of her curious statements in the New York trial, Imelda Marcos said all they wanted was a few more years to tidy up their finances. I suppose she was referring to her acquisition of several multimillion-dollar buildings in Manhattan which she acquired with cash and loan mortgages. She had wished that if they must lose the Presidency they would do so with the kind of cash and investments suitable to her ambitions. At the time she was referred to as one of the richest women in the world. If she would no longer be First Lady of the Philippines, she would continue to hobnob with the rich and famous in London, New York and Paris, by virtue of a megafortune acquired during Marcos’s presidency which included fabulous skyscrapers in Manhattan. She could not see herself as merely rich by Philippine standards because what she wanted most of all was to overtake the local rich. That is the standard of the Marcos legacy that Erap now hopes to emulate: To be megarich by 2004 if the people will let him go that far.

* * *

Term limits and Erap’s drive to a megafortune. Pretending to be concerned about constitutional amendments before the May 1998 elections, in fact Erap, once elected president, was ever conscious that he had only six years to make it to the standard of his idol, Ferdinand Marcos. In a recent interview with Luis Chavit Singson, he told me that Erap was fond of saying to him as if to justify his money-making through illegal jueteng protection money, "Wala na namang reeleksiyon." So those who think that term limits encourage good politics are sadly mistaken. Erap is the prime example of the bad side of term limits. As far as Erap is concerned and other officials like him who see public office as an opportunity to make megabucks, term limits forced him to work double time as far as his personal enrichment is concerned. Term limits do not guarantee that an elected official will do well just because he is not distracted by the possibility of re-election. Indeed for a good official who is truly sincere about public service, term limits may be an unnecessary obstacle to fulfill a program of reform or even to begin to show the results of good governance. The only effective term limit is to give the people the capability to re-elect a good official if they see fit. Conversely, the people should also be empowered to remove a bad official, if necessary, even before his term ends.

* * *

"Everyone has a price." In a recent gathering of friends we asked ourselves just how we have come to be where we are now? Was it the way we conduct our elections? Was it our Constitution which failed us? Each of these factors contributed some bad effect but ultimately it comes down to values. If the most important thing to a Filipino is how much money a person makes and to be able to display that wealth, Erap should not come as a surprise. This is probably what Congressman Agapito ‘Butz’ Aquino meant when he said Erap is a reflection of ourselves. It may be on the side of hyperbole since not all of us are drunkards or lechers. But Butz is right if what he meant is that Erap’s drive to a megafortune is a reflection of our values. In a money-obsessed society, for Erap as it was also for Imelda, "Everyone has a price." Erap calculates, surrounded as he is by fawning cabinet members, senators-judges, and the Fuentebella Congress, he would have enough support to brazen his way to an acquittal.

* * *

Why an acquittal, not a conviction, will be more dangerous to the body politic. Paradoxically, there is a faction in the military which is concerned with an acquittal for Erap. This faction prefers an acquittal. They have the capability and aim to seize power if there is a violent response from the public when Erap is acquitted. The acquittal of Erap is the opportunity this faction is waiting for and it will not necessarily be for or against Erap, this political analyst warns. It will be for themselves. Although a military man himself he fears it will be the military government of the Pakistani model disguised as the protector of democracy. This is the opportunity they are aching for. The bombings as well as the attacks on Vice President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo may be pelude to this military seizure of power. Any illusion that this military option will last only for a short time to restore stability should be disabused. A military government which sets itself to a program of reform can last for as long as sixty years. On the other hand, a conviction will be less messy. It will be consistent with justice as far as the evidence and testimonies already presented by the prosecution. It will immediately restore our standing in the community of nations as a country with responsible constitutional government.

* * *

Clarissa’s brave testimony is a symbol of new politics. That is why our only hope for a more peaceful and early return to normalcy is a conviction and the immediate installment of the constitutional successor – Vice President Arroyo. It may be over-optimistic on my part, but I continue to have faith that Erap will not get the number he needs for an acquittal. The senators-judges would think very hard before they make any deals with Erap, mindful that the price of their vote for acquittal is the anger and disgust from the public and consequently the threat of military rule. That is why the nation will forever be in the debt of Luis Chavit Singson for his initial revelations, and now to Clarissa Ocampo for her testimony on both the Jose Velarde account and the attempt to cover up. I like to believe that this is the new politics and that Clarissa Ocampo represents a renewed Filipino citizenry waking up to their sovereignty, unwilling to be afraid or be intimidated by powerful politicians, judges or bosses. The country’s future is in the hands of such individuals.

* * *

Citizens’ Watch: In last week’s column, I wrote about the alleged commissions in the project that would dump Metro Manila’s rubbish in Semirara Island to the detriment not only of the residents there but also leakages that will affect other places on the way to the dumpsite. But there is another case of money-making that some people ought to look into. Who’s making the money in this one? A friend who is a banker reminded me to take a closer look at the three-year $200-million loan recently signed up by the Erap government with Chase Manhattan Bank. Former Trade and Industry Secretary Mar Roxas first exposed this curious deal. Why did Chase clinch this loan transaction when it would cost the Philippines a floating rate of 420 basis points above the London interbank offered rate (Libor). This is far above the price of Philippine papers with similar maturity. This is a call for help for patriotic investment bankers. First stop is perhaps to reach Finance Secretary Jose "Titoy" Pardo to explain why he closed with Chase.

* * *

My e-mail address is [email protected]