How easily we forget what the Abus and MILF can do: Remember Ipil?

There is too much name-calling and finger-pointing in our too often hysterical society. What I fear is that, sooner or later, government policies and even legislation will be unduly influenced by pressure groups, or even dictated by the rantings of what have been called the "unelected and unelectable."

I’m referring to the organized and obviously well-funded so-called "civil society" goody-goodies and the various non-governmental organizations (NGOs) who act increasingly as if they, and they alone, have a monopoly on wisdom, integrity and patriotism.

Not even the judiciary, which is supposed to be an independent branch of government – independent, surely, of the executive and legislative departments – has been spared the intrusion and noisy meddling by certain self-righteous advocates from the civil society (I won’t call them, as some resentful quarters do, the "evil society") as well as some self-anointed graft watchers and NGOs. What bothers me most is that decisions of the Supreme Court which these advocates do not like are not only being publicly criticized, but they are being assailed even before they have been read by the critics. How can, to strike a parallel, a film critic "review" a movie and pronounce it "lousy", without having first viewed the movie?

Worse, the writers of such "unpopular" decisions and the members of the High Tribunal who signed the decisions are even being vilified and accused of having been bought.

* * *

A Justice of the Supreme Court said to me the other day that criticisms of the rulings of the Court are very welcome. Like the actuations and decisions of other public officials, the High Court’s rulings can and should be the subject of public scrutiny and, if need be, adverse comment. That’s what our friend, the magistrate, reiterated.

On the other hand, before publicly assailing any rulings of the Court, the Justice pointed out, the critics should first read and understand the decisions. How can we disagree? Our society’s growing penchant to shoot-from-the-hip should be cause for dismay.

Take two Supreme Court decisions that are now the subject of public criticisms launched by those who disagree with them. One is the decision in the case of former San Juan Mayor Jinggoy Estrada versus Sandiganbayan. The Court’s decision concerned the validity of the amended information for "plunder" filed with the anti-graft court against Jinggoy Estrada and his right to post bail.

The issue involved, of course, appears to be a ticklish and debatable issue – which is why there are dissenting opinions registered by some magistrates against the majority opinion. However, on actually reading the ruling, one finds that the Court did not deny or reject Jinggoy Estrada’s right to post bail. The High Court simply endorsed the matter to the Sandiganbayan for hearing and resolution.

"This Court is not in a position to grant bail to the petitioner as the matter requires evidentiary hearing that should be conducted by the Sandiganbayan," that’s what the High Court said. Thus, it is incorrect to allege that Jinggoy Estrada was denied bail by the Supreme Court.

The second hullaballoo is even more acrimonious. The controversy whipped up by critics concerns the Metro Manila Development Authority (MMDA) vs. JANCOM Environmental Corporation, et al. or Case G.R. 147465. The goody-goody two shoes bunch, spearheaded by groups like the Koalisyon Linis Basura and an array of NGOs, immediately vented their fury on the 3rd Division of the Supreme Court, angrily declaring that the P390 billion "garbage contract scam" had been justified by grave errors in the Supreme Court’s 3rd Division ruling. The critics fumed and "hinted" that certain Justices had been fixed, even naming one senior Justice in particular. Isn’t this a grave, even libelous accusation? What proof do they have about their whispered but widely disseminated allegations?

* * *

Looking at that P390 billion JANCOM "incinerator" deal, I can only say that, indeed, in my own opinion, it’s dangerously overpriced, and agree with other columnists who’ve already expressed themselves: GMA musn’t sign it.

That having been said, let me point out that the management contract between the government and JANCOM, as the High Court itself noted, "has not yet become an effective document," because the President has not affixed her signature on the document, which is required. Neither did her predecessors, former President Fidel V. Ramos and Joseph Estrada affix their signatures on that document.

The 3rd Division’s ruling was penned by Associate Justice Jose A. R. Melo, and concurred with by Associate Justices Jose C. Vitug, Artemio V. Panganiban, Angelina Sandoval Gutierrez and Antonio T. Carpio. Who among these would the critics insist had been "bought"? Look at their names.

I submit that those who disagree with the above ruling, and the other one on Jinggoy, should pursue their remedies within the High Court, i.e. file their motions for reconsideration, instead of noisily ventilating their arguments before the media and the public. Although both cases have already been resolved, the cases could still be sub-judice, because the rulings have not yet become final and executory. In the end, it is neither media nor the public that must finally dispose of these cases, but the Supreme Court itself where the cases were filed.

To be candid, I would have been more impressed with the allegations hurled against the 3rd Division, if the collection of NGOs who condemned the ruling did not have their own garbage disposal proposal. Hello, there!

They may be full of virtue, and their intentions simon-pure, but those shining "qualities" do not prevent observers from suspecting that, while blowing the whistle on a seriously-flawed and highly-suspicious multibillion-peso "scam", they could also be pursuing their own self-interest.

* * *

The war in Afghanistan is finally heating up, just when the rest of the world thought it was virtually over. The United States in the past few days has been taking its heaviest losses, as its troops and aircraft try to wipe out, or at least flush out hundreds – or even as many as 4,000 – Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters making a stand in the snow-bound mountains of eastern Afghanistan.

From reports, about 20 Americans have been killed in the action thus far (but that information is more than a day old) and casualties have surely been mounting. They’ve lost another MH-47 CHINOOK helicopter which was shot down by groundfire and enemy rockets as it flew to the battle in Paktia province. Six Americans were slain, if not in the crash in the firefight that took place after the chopper had been forced to the ground. Another Special Forces CHINOOK was damaged by a rocket-propelled grenade, but managed to fly off and land near Gardez. When a head-count was taken, however, one US serviceman was missing – and presumed to have fallen off, or been "picked off" while the helicopter was lifting itself out of the danger zone.

We can be certain that there will be more American and allied Afghan fatalities and casualties in the days to come. The hard-core Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters are hitting back with unusual ferocity this time, even though cave-busting "thermobarbic" bombs are now being dropped on them and their tunnel complexes by the high-flying B-52s that are the attack work-horses of this conflict.

The current encounters disprove the idea that a "clean" war, without Vietnam-style casualties, can be waged by American forces, with the US battering its enemies from the air and knocking them out with the most modern weaponry and gadgetry. In the end, as always, men slugging it out on the ground will decide the outcome. The same thing is true of Basilan, Zamboanga and, ultimately, other areas of confrontation in Mindanao, from Maguindanao to Lanao and Cotabato.

Will the Americans get sucked into a wider confrontation elsewhere in Mindanao? Despite their protestations, I believe, they’re not just here to rescue two elderly American missionaries, the Burnhams, nor our captive nurse, Ediborah Yap (who, alas, seems to have less priority than the missionary couple from Wichita, Kansas). That thing about the unfortunate Burnhams is for the consumption of local media, as well as the folks back home.

I wish our own Armed Forces Chief of Staff, General Diomedio Villanueva, would stop announcing that operations were being mounted to rescue Martin and Gracia Burnham. Such pronouncements zap the will of our officers and men in the field to shoot it out with the Abu Sayyaf, since, whenever they spot roving bands of Abus, too often the Burnhams are seen being tugged about (Martin in chains) behind them. The hostages, the Abus know, remain their "human shield". Since our boys are reluctant to shoot and catch the Burnhams in the crossfire (perhaps fatally), how on earth can we defeat the Abu Sayyaf?

* * *

As expected, our government’s chief peace-monger, Secretary (and retired General) Eduardo Ermita is announcing that there will be a meeting between the government peace panelists and the leaders of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) to determine whether the recent clashes in Maguindanao were triggered by our government troops, or by the MILF, or by other "rebel" elements.

Shucks, what are our soldiers supposed to do? When they see armed bands of men roving about, or shooting at people and torching bulldozers or villages (as the case may be), should our troops first ask the marauders to produce identification cards or documents proving that they belong to the MILF before opening fire? Would opening fire on armed men who’re on the attack, or fleeing from the scene of an attack, be a violation of the "ceasefire" signed by Ermita and Presidential "negotiator" Jesus Dureza in Kuala Lumpur? Or that inane agreement in Tripoli?

Sus, how can we handcuff our boys and yet expect them to maintain peace and order? By our urong-sulong policy, we’re putting our Armed Forces troops at risk. He who hesitates with his finger on the trigger is usually lost in battle. Don’t let an "enemy" get in the first shot. That’s the cardinal rule.

I don’t mean that our men should be as trigger-happy as the jumpy soldiers of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) who’re popping off at every Palestinian vehicle they see, but, again, since the Israelis are reeling from an almost endless succession of suicide-bomber and Palestinian sniper assaults, despite their hitting back with helicopter gunships and tank forays in full fury, it’s understandable why their troops are so paranoid.

In the treacherous swamps and forests of Mindanao, being "jumpy", sad to say, is more healthy than being complacent. The latter usually come to a violent end. And yes, some of the MILF – whatever their protestations of innocence – have, like their brethren the Abus, the quaint practice of also, when moody, beheading their soldier-captives.

Just as his Pakistani "terrorist" kidnappers beheaded The Wall Street Journal, reporter Daniel Pearl, the beheading of captives seems to be fashionable among Islamic jihadis.

* * *

I still say that we’ll have to brace ourselves for a major strike by the MILF, and even the MILF, the Abus, and the New People’s Army (NPA) combined.

Can they pull one off? As early as October 21, 1972, the Moro "blackshirts" of the original Mindanao Independence Movement (MIM) and their Bangsamoro bravos seized Marawi City for two days.

If you’re inclined to dismiss the effectiveness of the Abu Sayyaf (who’re being scoffed at nowadays as mere kidnappers and bandits), you’ve surely forgotten about the Ipil attack and massacre of April 4, 1995. Ipil is a predominantly Catholic town (Zamboanga del Sur) in Mindanao, some 800 km. south of Manila. It was a very prosperous town, with several banks, and a center in the Zamboanga peninsula of business and transportation activity.

At 12:30 p.m. that day in 1995, out of the blue, more than 200 heavily-armed men fell on the unsuspecting municipality. The orgy of murder, looting and arson did not come to a conclusion until 3 p.m. When the raiders departed, they left the town center on fire, and the corpses of 53 dead, plus another 44 wounded.

More than half a billion pesos had been looted from the different commercial banks and business establishments. Among those killed during the carnage was Major David Sabido, the commanding officer of the 10th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army. The raiders even had the leisure to collar and take away with them 13 hostages.

It turned out that the 200 marauders had been a combined contingent of Abu Sayyaf, MILF, and cadres of the so-called Moro National Liberation Front "lost command."

Before the group surreptitiously barged into Ipil, some elements of the insurgent force had created a diversion at dawn of the same day by attacking the security guards of a gold mine 25 kilometers outside the town. In the meantime, the main force was headed towards Ipil itself on board buses and trucks. Though the local population had spotted the armed men on their way to Ipil, because most of the bandits were wearing fatigue uniforms (pretending to be soldiers and policemen), it had been mistakenly believed the approaching insurgents were indeed government troops and PNP.

Can the Abus, MILF, and, you bet, the MNLF pull off such a wild caper again? Today, even more so. After all, those ex-MNLF guerrillas – thanks to the 1996 peace agreement – now can sport legitimate PNP and Army uniforms. The crafty Greek hero, Ulysees, with his "Trojan Horse" at Troy, could not have conceived of a much better strategy to infiltrate our military and police.

The word is: Beware of the Ides of March!