The deterioration of the Senate
MANILA, Philippines?There was a time when the Senate was fully respected, when Manuel L. Quezon was elected its first President under the Jones Law in 1916. This popular feeling lasted with the people when Sergio Osmeña joined the chamber as president pro tempore and Manuel A. Roxas, his partner in the pro-anti squabble of 1934 followed, under the reunited Nacionalista Party.
This feeling of unity among the Nacionalistas raised no alarm except for one of their men, Jose P. Laurel, who was replaced in the Senate by Claro M. Recto, head of the fledgling Democratas. Recto?s presence did not affect the power of the Nacionalistas in the appointment of persons to various offices, including members of the Supreme Court.
The change came with the creation of the Liberal Party headed by the rebel Roxas as president of the Senate. His victory in 1948 as the new President of the Philippines changed the rules on appointments altogether, with the appointees chosen solely by the party in power. This rule was applied as well to the choice of candidates to elective offices, which was determined at the traditional conventions. The choice was made by the party in power alone.
Thus, it was formerly possible for an aspirant for public office to demand that he be chosen by decision of the party convention and not by a cabal of cigar-smoking executives of the party in power. That is how those who topped the senatorial elections were selected.
Examples are Camilo Osias who wrote the Philippine Reader that students studied in grade school and also Jovito R. Salonga, another topnotcher in the senatorial election, for having distinguished himself as a student in Harvard and, later, as a member of its faculty, an honor never before accorded a Filipino.
The 1987 Constitution has effected its own change in the manner of choosing elective candidates. It has abolished the two-party system and replaced it with the multiparty system, which usually does not permit a party to exist by itself but allows it to operate in tandem with others. That is where the problem exists.
The choice of the candidate is not made by the usual party convention but by decision of the strongest party with the privilege of making the final decision. Thus, groups like the senatorial candidates of the Lakas-Kampi-CMD were chosen by its head Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo with disastrous results. Two former leaders were snatched from the opposition, with one lost and the other ceasing to be an oppositionist.
Her choice of the senatorial candidates this year reflects her lack of respect for the electorate that entrusted her with the office she now holds. This choice must be made with the greatest of wisdom and with the realization that it may affect the future of the country one is supposed to serve above all else. It also demonstrates the lack of honor?and also sheer intelligence?on the part of the people she would entrust with the future of the nation.
Who are the men and women who have been certified as the new members of the Senate and will sit with the incumbent members whose term will expire in 2013? They are, assuming there was no anomaly in their election: Ramon Revilla Jr., Jinggoy Estrada, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Franklin Drilon, Juan Ponce Enrile, Pia Cayetano, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Rafael Recto, Tito Sotto, Sergio Osmeña, Lito Lapid, and Teofisto Guingona III.
I have no quarrel with most of them except those who had been chosen, shall we say, haphazardly.
Revilla, who topped the list of winners, served as the plastic hero in many popular movies and television shows while serving as a senator of the land and getting paid for it.
Estrada, while serving as senator, spent much of his official time preparing and delivering his privilege speeches in defense of charges made against his father by Sen. Panfilo Lacson, who has since disappeared.
Sotto, who was rejected in the 2007 senatorial elections, denounced a security guard for refusing him entry into a private subdivision and blocked the acceptance of a committee report providing for the prosecution of the disappeared Senator Lacson.
And Lapid, who never attended a meeting of the Senate en banc, is expected to repeat his past performance. Will he go to the observation room next to the session hall and not participate in the proceedings of his colleagues as a senator of the land?
Should this be the sworn conduct of duly elected senators of the Philippines? Could we not have expected more than this from Adel Tamano, Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel, and Ruffy Biazon, who all lost in the last senatorial election? Would Manuel L. Quezon have permitted such action from the members of the old Senate?
Each generation has its own peculiarities. But the current strangeness would easily be rejected by earlier office-holders who respected the traditional conduct based on honor and self-respect. Sadly, this is not followed by many occupiers of present offices who hold them as opportunities for self-advancement and cupidity.
This feeling of unity among the Nacionalistas raised no alarm except for one of their men, Jose P. Laurel, who was replaced in the Senate by Claro M. Recto, head of the fledgling Democratas. Recto?s presence did not affect the power of the Nacionalistas in the appointment of persons to various offices, including members of the Supreme Court.
The change came with the creation of the Liberal Party headed by the rebel Roxas as president of the Senate. His victory in 1948 as the new President of the Philippines changed the rules on appointments altogether, with the appointees chosen solely by the party in power. This rule was applied as well to the choice of candidates to elective offices, which was determined at the traditional conventions. The choice was made by the party in power alone.
Thus, it was formerly possible for an aspirant for public office to demand that he be chosen by decision of the party convention and not by a cabal of cigar-smoking executives of the party in power. That is how those who topped the senatorial elections were selected.
Examples are Camilo Osias who wrote the Philippine Reader that students studied in grade school and also Jovito R. Salonga, another topnotcher in the senatorial election, for having distinguished himself as a student in Harvard and, later, as a member of its faculty, an honor never before accorded a Filipino.
The 1987 Constitution has effected its own change in the manner of choosing elective candidates. It has abolished the two-party system and replaced it with the multiparty system, which usually does not permit a party to exist by itself but allows it to operate in tandem with others. That is where the problem exists.
The choice of the candidate is not made by the usual party convention but by decision of the strongest party with the privilege of making the final decision. Thus, groups like the senatorial candidates of the Lakas-Kampi-CMD were chosen by its head Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo with disastrous results. Two former leaders were snatched from the opposition, with one lost and the other ceasing to be an oppositionist.
Her choice of the senatorial candidates this year reflects her lack of respect for the electorate that entrusted her with the office she now holds. This choice must be made with the greatest of wisdom and with the realization that it may affect the future of the country one is supposed to serve above all else. It also demonstrates the lack of honor?and also sheer intelligence?on the part of the people she would entrust with the future of the nation.
Who are the men and women who have been certified as the new members of the Senate and will sit with the incumbent members whose term will expire in 2013? They are, assuming there was no anomaly in their election: Ramon Revilla Jr., Jinggoy Estrada, Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Franklin Drilon, Juan Ponce Enrile, Pia Cayetano, Ferdinand Marcos Jr., Rafael Recto, Tito Sotto, Sergio Osmeña, Lito Lapid, and Teofisto Guingona III.
I have no quarrel with most of them except those who had been chosen, shall we say, haphazardly.
Revilla, who topped the list of winners, served as the plastic hero in many popular movies and television shows while serving as a senator of the land and getting paid for it.
Estrada, while serving as senator, spent much of his official time preparing and delivering his privilege speeches in defense of charges made against his father by Sen. Panfilo Lacson, who has since disappeared.
Sotto, who was rejected in the 2007 senatorial elections, denounced a security guard for refusing him entry into a private subdivision and blocked the acceptance of a committee report providing for the prosecution of the disappeared Senator Lacson.
And Lapid, who never attended a meeting of the Senate en banc, is expected to repeat his past performance. Will he go to the observation room next to the session hall and not participate in the proceedings of his colleagues as a senator of the land?
Should this be the sworn conduct of duly elected senators of the Philippines? Could we not have expected more than this from Adel Tamano, Risa Hontiveros-Baraquel, and Ruffy Biazon, who all lost in the last senatorial election? Would Manuel L. Quezon have permitted such action from the members of the old Senate?
Each generation has its own peculiarities. But the current strangeness would easily be rejected by earlier office-holders who respected the traditional conduct based on honor and self-respect. Sadly, this is not followed by many occupiers of present offices who hold them as opportunities for self-advancement and cupidity.
Walang komento:
Mag-post ng isang Komento