Out of order

If we are to consider the line of reasoning followed by Andres Manuel, defense counsel for the suspects in the Maguindanao Massacre, the story could have gone this way: on November 23, 2009, some of the 58 people who died in the gruesome murder could have spontaneously died from seizures. They could have bludgeoned themselves to death, or some of them may have shot themselves with high-caliber guns (one shooting himself or herself nine times).

The graves and the backhoe would have just been there, incidental objects, part of a tableau of unexplainable gore. A few hours later, a horde of feral necrophiliacs would have attacked the victims. Following this conjecture, the massacre would have not happened at all, and the incident would have been a very bizarre case of mass suicide.

Harry Roque described the insinuations as “ridiculous.” A commenter in The STAR article described it as obscene: not only does it dishonor the memory of the victims, but it is a mockery of the cause for justice. As an attempt to cast reasonable doubt on the case to put the Ampatuans and the suspects in jail, it is not only unreasonable, but one that is completely out of order. To call it “clutching at straws” is an attack to human desperation: it is nothing short of callous, outrageous and insidious.

To be fair, it is possible to attack the handling and processing of the evidence against those implicated in the Maguindanao massacre. If indeed the autopsies were conducted using bamboo sticks, and if Insp. Dean Cabrera did in fact have some oversights and lapses in his investigation, then there is reason to cast doubt on the integrity of the evidence. But to go as far as to insinuate necrophilia or self-harm is quite disrespectful.

When all evidence, testimony and other factors point to a massacre actually happening, there is no point in denying it. The fact to the matter is that the murder was cold, methodical and any which way you look at it, it was a massacre of gruesome and odious proportions. Could 300 witnesses to the worst crime in the Philippines have had the whole thing wrong, and were all witnesses to a metaphysical anomaly? Whether or not it was rhetorical or kidding is out of the question.

To be fair, it may be a legal maneuver to reduce the number of murders the suspects could be convicted of. Yet if legal maneuvers step over the lines drawn by common morality and sensibilities, then it becomes completely out of order.

The Maguindanao massacre represents more than just a quest for justice for 58 murder victims. It represents the upper limit of political impunity. To treat it with the kind of out-of-this-world theories and postulations in defense of the suspects involved in the worst and most heinous crime ever committed in the Philippines in the past decade would not only be degrading to the victims, but insulting to the intelligence of those who choose not to forget.

I always thought that the height of irreverence and insensitivity towards the victims of the Ampatuan massacre was that it isn't being talked about anymore, not with the vehicles the President drives, and the frivolities of controversy from people who have the least to care for in a gruesome act fueled by impunity and political ignominy. In a country where the upper limit of tolerance is almost always challenged by something even more incredulous and ridiculous than what is perceived, “out of order” should be, at the very least, unexpected.

Then this happened.