This article is not about what we already know. It is written true to its off-tangent nature, to show some sidelights in the session. For one, when the plenary session opened, Congressman Emilio Espinosa presided. Many were surprised by the move. I was one of them. The session was supposed to be a highly explosive situation calling, no less, for the steady hands of the grizzled veteran in the person of Speaker Jose de Venecia.
Why was it, I asked myself, that, notwithstanding the expected confrontational atmosphere, the administration left the task of presiding the session to Congressman Espinosa? No doubt, the Masbate congressman had the competence, and, Representative Fuentebella was most gracious in pointing out that fact, but really, I thought there must be a compelling reason for Speaker de Venecia to yield the gavel to him.
When, I noticed the presence of former President Corazon Cojuangco Aquino somewhere in the gallery, I thought I could hazard a reason. The appearance of the former president was projected to lend moral support to the pro-impeachment camp. She was there not to inspire the men and women loyal to the sitting president, whose side she placed her bet in the last 2004 polls. Rather, Cory obviously wanted to show her support for the impeachment complaints, particularly the amended one. With the giant shadow of a former president cast upon the hallowed halls of Congress, Rep. Espinosa would be the best person to handle the session.
It was historically natural to pick on this Masbate solon. He would not be daunted by the so-called Cory magic much less intimidated by her. The Aquinos and the Espinosas had a long history of political confrontation. Meling was a fierce ally of former President Ferdinand Marcos. In a senatorial election of the distant past, (when I was not an elector yet) Cory's husband, Sen. Benigno Aquino Jr., and Congressman Espinosa, locked horns. Ninoy, a Liberal party stalwart, then only 34 years old when the campaign season started, was deemed the run-away opposition leader. He had to be stopped.
Hoping to derail Ninoy's candidacy, Espinosa, contending that the constitutional qualification for one seeking to be a senator was 35 years, questioned the age qualification of Ninoy. Eventually, the phrase "at the time of election" was construed to cover the period ending in the proclamation of the candidate. Yes, it favored Ninoy's cause. But, remember again, it was, for all practical purposes, an Aquino-Espinosa war.
Then, another sidelight was the absence of Congresswoman Marcos. Remember, by being an indorser to the amended complaint, she rode on the perceived more popular stand. Necessarily, she gained some adherents. Her family name, famous or infamous, depending on your perception, earned points. Because of the importance of the occasion, the whole country was focused on the players. Many of our people who hardly slept the night the House of Representatives was deliberating the report of its Committee on Justice, awaited the pronouncements of each legislator. After all, it was the constitutional duty of all of our congressmen to take a stand.
When Rep. Marcos was nowhere to be seen, she, to me, showed her real character. Her no-show was typical of a traditional politician and her act a betrayal of her colleagues. It would easy to surmise that she made herself scarce because she knew the opposition would not get the required one-third membership of the house to forward the impeachment complaint to Senate. In the face of that imminent debacle, she should not have abandoned her allies. The more honorable thing for her to do was to prove that behind her signature was an honor. She lost that chance to be counted on the side of the honorable.