So Erap was lying after all!

Let's give credit where credit is due. The first person I know who originally peddled the idea of turning the entire Province of Cebu into a Special Economic Zone was former Cebu Governor Emilio "Lito" Osmeña. Now because this idea was given a new life by Mr. Francis Monera, the newly-elected President of the Cebu Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Inc. (CCCI) everyone wants to push this to fruition. Now whether this could become a reality or not depends largely on whether Pres. Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (GMA) herself believes in this concept for Cebu or not.

The problem we usually encounter when a great idea like this is proposed to the government is that, there are just too many Filipinos inborn with that ugly trait called "Crab Mentality." The uniqueness of this proposal gets diluted; its objective gone to naught. I'm not saying that the government would disapprove this plan, I'm merely stating that there are many Pinoy crabs out there who would block this proposal. This is why a few columns ago, we discussed the possibility of doing what Montenegro just did in Serbia.

Montenegro and Serbia were part of that fractured nation called Yugoslavia, which disintegrated when its strongman ruler Marshal Tito died. All that led to the Balkan war in the 90s, which caused the same but different nations into an ugly war, especially between Serbia and Croatia.

But last week, the people of Montenegro, tired of the ugly politicians in Serbia decided to take matters in their own hands and did the most democratic thing to do in these matters - they conducted a referendum asking the question whether they wanted to breakaway with Serbia and start a new life as a new nation. Last week Montenegrins overwhelmingly voted to become Europe's newest nation. So the question is, if we're just as tired with the old political ways of Imperial Manila, why can't we in the Visayas also conduct a similar referendum to ask the people living in this part of the country whether we wish to break away from the Philippines? While we're writing this as a food for thought, who knows where it could lead us?

* * *

After repeatedly denying that he signed as Jose Velarde, former President Joseph "Erap" Estrada finally admitted during his trial before the Sandiganbayan that he indeed signed the bank document as Jose Velarde. But it took more than five years for him to openly declare this as a fact. But when confronted about this when the issue was fresh in the newspapers, Erap was the denial king, denying everything thrown against him. So the question is, why is it only now that Erap is admitting this fact?

I would like to believe that Erap's lawyers studied this issue very well and decided that it was "safe" to admit this in court; after all, they insist that Erap broke no laws when he signed as Jose Velarde. They have always maintained that the account belonged to Jaime Dichaves and Erap didn't do anything illegal by signing a fictitious name. At this point, we leave the legal discussion to the hands of the Sandiganbayan, but what we can say for sure is that Erap is a big liar; after all, he denied this until he was in court a couple of days ago.

At the very least, Erap is guilty of perjury because he denied all these allegations under oath and even pointed to PCI Vice-Pres. Clarissa Ocampo as the liar. I'm sure that we'll hear more from Erap about his innocence, but the truth is, with his back against the wall, the better part of valor is for him to admit certain things he used to deny and get him off the hook by insisting on his innocence.

* * *

The news that the Arroyo government would now allow journalists to carry firearms outside their residence, has elicited a debate within media circles as to whether this idea would solve the problem of journalists being killed. There are journalists who merely want the killings of their fellow journalists solved and for government to enact measures to prevent the killings of media personalities in the future. Others fully concur with the idea that a mediaman who packs his piece might stand a better chance of surviving a potential attack against his person.

Actually both arguments are correct. A mediaman who is armed and I should insist well trained in the use of firearms would surely have a better chance of surviving an attack compared to an unarmed person. A case in point is what happened to my good friend Choy Torralba who was shot as he got out of his radio station. If he didn't carry a gun and fired back, the gunman would have finished him off! But then again, there are no guarantees in life that even if you packed a piece, you'd survive an attack. As for the solution of the many killings against journalists, the government must find ways to solve those killings because Justice demands that they solve it.

* * *

For email responses to this article, write to [email protected].