Life in the peanut gallery - SKETCHES by Ana Marie Pamintuan

No eating (I’m barred forever), no talking, no standing up or leaning over for a better view. When nature calls, you have to ask the sergeant-at-arms, "May I go out?" And no looking at Senator-Judge Miriam Defensor-Santiago, if you know what’s good for you, especially when Senator-Judge Raul Roco is indulging in his favorite pastime of annoying her.

Our favorite telenovela was interrupted for nearly an hour yesterday by an outburst from Senator-Judge Miriam (we’re still allowed to call her Miriam, are we?). I must confess (at the risk of being picketed) that I used to be an avid Miriam fan. She is, as you’ve all seen, quite eloquent. She used to have a terrific sense of humor, especially when skewering her enemies. Yesterday, some anti-Erap people were thanking the heavens that Erap defeated Miriam in 1998. Others found the Senate episode hilarious. No wonder we’ve become addicted to this soap opera.

What happened, Your Honor? Do you have to behave like Mike Tyson? How this crisis has turned our world upside-down.

* * *

If the Senate impeachment court keeps taking protracted breaks for every spectator in the peanut gallery who grins, chuckles or gives senators a "provocative look" (what’s that?), this trial will continue beyond June 30, 2004.

Senator-Judge Miriam’s outburst eclipsed the testimony of prosecution witness Jazmine Banal and competed with the apprehension by government agents of the usual suspects in terrorist attacks in Metro Manila. And that microphone episode involving Senator-Judge John Osmeña and GMA 7 eclipsed the testimony of PAGCOR official Emilia Padua.

Such excitement. No wonder the most coveted theater seats in the country these days are those in the Senate gallery. Still, being a spectator at the Senate can be hazardous to one’s health. There’s an upside to being part of the larger peanut gallery – those who simply follow the proceedings on TV or radio. We can hoot, jeer, laugh until we get gas pains, stand up anytime. And we can change channels when the proceedings get boring.

* * *

From our vantage point in the virtual gallery, we’re wondering how long Estelito Mendoza will remain as defense counsel. No, we’re not part of a conspiracy to get him out of the defense team. But you have to be hallucinating to miss the holes in Mendoza’s story about the Jaime Dichaves document. Was the office of George Go, at the time still the chairman of Equitable PCI Bank, too small he had to drop by Mendoza’s office unannounced and borrow it to draw up a document that everyone knew would be crucial in an ongoing impeachment trial? What about the office of Dichaves? Why, even Clarissa Ocampo’s office at Equitable PCI Bank would have been comfortable enough. Can anyone just drop by the office of one of the busiest lawyers in town?

And if all those controversial characters are in your office, wouldn’t a top-notch defense lawyer at least wonder what they’re up to, since he might find himself implicated in something anomalous?

* * *

Apart from waiting for a more satisfactory explanation from Mendoza, what we want is for President Erap to take the witness stand. If he doesn’t want to go to the Senate, he can do a Bill Clinton and allow himself to be questioned at Malacañang. Then the videotaped proceedings can be shown to the public.

Why do we insist on the President’s testimony? Because video, as the Clinton testimony showed, can be a merciless medium. It shows every frown, every eye movement, every twitch of the mouth. It shows a restless hand. It showed what Bill Clinton really meant when he said he did not have sex with that woman.

On video, you can come off squirming even when you’re sitting still. The eyes, as they say, are the windows of the soul. Just by looking at someone’s eyes, many people can immediately tell a lie. Can President Erap look us in the eye and convince the nation that he’s innocent, as he keeps insisting in his visits to poor areas? Or will he come off like another former US president, Richard Nixon, saying, "I am not a crook!"?

There are people who find it endearing that Joseph Estrada is a very bad liar, that he says what he means and means what he says. With Erap, his supporters say, what you see is what you get, no hypocrisy. If he’s telling the truth in this impeachment case, he should use this endearing quality to convince the nation of his innocence. Face your accusers, Mr. President. Those in the peanut gallery promise to behave.