According to Wikipedia, the colloquialism “means that one should not presume to know the outcome of an event which is still in progress. More specifically, the phrase is used when a situation is (or appears to be) nearing its conclusion.”
“It cautions against assuming that the current state of an event is irreversible and clearly determines how or when the event will end.”
I use the above phrase in association with last Wednesday’s opera in Congress where members of Congress voted to impeach Vice President Sara Duterte, allegedly minus the participation of independent-minded congressmen.
That reportedly cost those representatives their seat at committee chairmanships and their individual congressional recess “pabaon” of P1 million that was allegedly raised to P1.5 million as a signing bonus for the impeachment of Vice President Sara Duterte.
The alleged “pabaon” suggests that the rumored tradition and practice of giving a “signing bonus for an impeachment” lives on and that the impeachment of VP Duterte has some collateral damage.
On the ground, the last-hour impeachment on the last day of Congress certainly raised eyebrows among Filipinos. “Why on the last hour?” “What were they hoping to achieve?” and will the impeachment prosper, given that the campaign and midyear elections are already here?
The last hour-last day timing actually reminded me of when courts and sheriffs issue warrants of arrest on late Friday afternoon, thereby denying or preventing accused parties the right to post bail and so they end up in jail for more than two days.
The last-minute impeachment was apparently done to make sure that the Vice President’s impeachment is carried over to the next Congress after the elections and is irreversible in Congress.
But even before the smoke settled, a number of senators have already stolen the thunder from the impeachment. Several of them have explained that nothing happens until the Senate decides to undertake the necessary process to start the “trial” of the Vice President.
But as most observers expected, the senators have no intention of falling all over themselves like their congressional counterparts. From the interviews given during the night of the impeachment, the priority is to follow procedures carefully. Second to that, the priority of half of the Senate is the upcoming elections.
Some senators said that impeachment-related matters are best dealt with after the May elections and consequently, the outcome of the elections will, in some way or form, influence the movement of the impeachment going forward.
While Congress chose to end their session with a bang by impeaching the Vice President, there is now the possibility that their bang will backfire on them as well as administration candidates in the midterm elections.
The impeachment has drawn the “line in the sand” not just between pro- and anti-impeachment groups, but between the Marcos versus Duterte camps, the polarized Northern Alliance, Luzon versus the Visayas and Mindanao.
Religious groups such as the Iglesia Ni Cristo are expected to be more open with their support for those supporting their “Peace Initiative,” while Catholics and Evangelical groups have started to express their indignation against the abuses of the current Congress.
In case PBBM et al are living in denial, the dissatisfaction with and distrust of many businessmen and academics have slowly grown and are being shared online.
When you pair this with all the negative academic and economic data and studies being shared online regarding economic growth or the lack thereof, chances are the 2025 elections will be a rude awakening for the administration.
If the impeachment backfire does happen, chances are it will be career ending for many members of Congress and senatorial candidates of the administration. History buffs have even pointed out that in the time of PNoy, the administration lost in the midterm elections, and it could happen again.
* * *
While having my passport photos taken at Glorietta mall in Makati, I came across a former colleague and senior news anchor Bernadette Sembrano. During our high speed catch up, I confirmed that her family was one of the affected homeowners who were being “booted out” of John Hay by the BCDA.
Bernadette struggled to answer the question, given that she has always been low-key and did not even elaborate on the situation. As I expressed my support and prayers, I saw how much she appreciated the gesture.
From what I gathered, the family loved Baguio so much that she and her Kuya and mother had all pitched in to buy the cottage many years ago as a retirement place for the Mom and for themselves.
From there, her Kuya and Mom rented the Laperal house (the famous “White House”) along Leonard Wood Road where they put up a high-end dining destination called Joseph’s that is by reservation only and a bucket list for many tourists visiting Baguio.
So contrary to the disinformation being put out by trolls, many homeowners at Camp John Hay are not “billionaires” but overseas Filipinos, retirees and families who’ve combined their money to lease homes inside Camp John Hay.
But now, Bernadette and her fellow homeowners in Camp John Hay find themselves as “Third Party Victims” or collateral damage of a Supreme Court decision that did not protect third party rights.
Now alleged BCDA agents are “encouraging” or “advising” the homeowners to sue CJHDEV.CO to get their money back. But how do you sue a developer/seller in good faith who sold you the house/cottage 20-25 years ago? Besides, the homeowners simply want to finish their lease contract.
By now the units are almost fully depreciated. With 20 to 30 hectares of undeveloped land available, why is the BCDA prioritizing evicting legitimate homeowners and destroying an established community?
* * *
E-mail: utalk2ctalk@gmail.com