High drama

The People’s Chomp. His story is familiar: that of a young man who wanted a better future for himself and for his family. He left a home in the province that was marred by domestic and financial woes, to try his luck in Manila. This is a story that resonates with most Filipinos, for the reality and the dream are all-too similar.

Not surprisingly, when Manny Pacquiao started making a name for himself, the man from humble beginnings was soon hailed as “The People’s Champ.” He was, after all, one of “the People,” i.e. the common tao. Each victory was hailed as a national triumph. We cheered him on, as we watched his meteoric rise.

We got used to Manny winning, as though they were forgone conclusions. And because we could almost always count on the prospect that he would win, people started taking to other ways to entertain themselves. His personal and marital “issues” became fodder for gossip, and his material purchases and that of his mother from his humongous earnings were the related stories to his headline-grabbing wins.

We built up the hero, propped up the persona, and perched him atop the pedestal beyond our reach only to strike at his faults and shortcomings, when boredom struck, an easy pastime. He’s only human after all.

*      *      *      *

The recent repercussions of the rematch between Pacquiao and Marquez is representative of the drama that has characterized the way we treat our “icons.” We were treated to a slew of victories that birthed a champ for our nation, but no sooner did we chomp and cut him down to size just because the fight was not what we expected it to be, a convincing and resounding victory. Never mind that, at the end of the day, unpredictability is the trademark of sports. And when participating in any sport, sportsmanship is a pre-requisite: graciousness in accepting victory, as much as in accepting defeat.

While one could easily concede that it is difficult to accept defeat, what is perplexing is how we seem to have difficulty in accepting victory. It was a close fight, yes and for that purpose, the judges’ decision ought to have settled the matter for us. But the criticisms kept pouring in. Tough crowd.

Never mind, of course, that, at the end of the day, the one person who really had it tough is the person in whose victories we vicariously lived out our fantasies. The hits and punches he received in the ring are part and parcel of the sport he signed up for. The low blows from his fellow men and women are another thing altogether.

We watch two men slug it out, from a safe and comfortable distance that is the entertainment in the sport of boxing. We got what we wanted. What more can we ask for, and what right have we to demand more from a man who really just wanted a better future for his family, and bring honor to our country?

*      *      *      *

Drama Queen. Not since the Quirino Grandstand hostage tragedy has the entire nation been transfixed to their TVs and radios than the developing story of the former President’s attempts to leave the country.

Hours after the Supreme Court resolved to grant her application for a Temporary Restraining Order, everyone watched with bated breath, as her ambulance parked outside NAIA Terminal 1. Mrs. Arroyo did not disappoint. She alighted accoutred in her now trademark neck brace, appearing frail and gaunt. She could have gone through the “regular” ramp entrance reserved for VIPs, but this time she chose to undergo the “regular” airport check-in procedure to the delight of the waiting media.

Thirty or so minutes pass, and the airplane departs without her.  

In the hours and days that followed, more drama ensued. And like an accident, it was hard to look away not that one could escape it. Unlike the boxing match from a few days prior, however, this was not we signed up for. 

*      *      *      *

Real-time and timing. Only time will tell, how all of this will play out.

Lawyers are trained to repose our faith in laws and jurisprudence. The rule of law is predicated on efficient predictability and repeatability. Lawyers stick out their necks and give legal advice, based on how they predict that the Court would rule given the law and a set of facts and circumstances.

The public discourse helps to shape and cast the issues. But in a country of laws, these issues are properly ventilated and settled by courts of justice. And when the courts speak, people should follow.  

These are unsettling and unsettled times, however. “Under normal circumstances” no longer carries the same sway. Yesterday morning, the Comelec resolved to charge Mrs. Arroyo with electoral sabotage. Barely two hours later, in a Special En Banc Session, the Supreme Court affirmed its earlier TRO, maintaining the same vote. (As of this writing, the charges have been filed and raffled to the sala of RTC Judge Jesus Mupas, who has since issued the much-awaited Warrant of Arrest.)

*      *      *      *

It’s hard to keep up.

That we are in this quandary is an illustration of the state of damage that our institutions are in. Of the three branches, for example, the Court is meant be the most impersonal. It’s not about the ponente (the opinion writer) but the ponencia (the decision). It, too, is meant to be the most enduring which is why, unlike the political branches, its members remain, as a general rule, until either retirement or death or impeachment gets in the way.

This impasse does not bode well for the country, and we can only hope that it is resolved sooner rather than later. Separation of powers does not mean that the branches are placed antagonistically against each other.

It is a dangerous game to play “who blinks first” and to ask who’s embarrassed in the process, because this is all embarrassing enough as it is.

*      *      *      *

“And I believe we need heroes, I believe we need certain people who we can measure our own shortcomings by.”  Richard Attenborough

*      *      *      *

E-mail: [email protected]