Through Privilege Speech: The Senator in Hot Water

It is in the instinct of man to protect his self in times of troubles. Sadly even more, man is, in his logic, compelled to address the problem by starting with statements that will, in any highest possibility, protect his self from judgments and disdains instead of focusing on dealing with the problem itself to eradicate it as early as possible or at least reduce the possibility of prolonging the problem that may lead to confusions and harder difficulty in resolving it in the long run.

 

This logic may be one of the biggest contributing factors that causes injustice and cluelessness of the people with regards to what may really be happening. Furthermore, focusing in our nation’s politics, this may be one of the common logics of politicians who, in our country, win through popular votes. In short, this logic is a common practice among them, a logic that concentrates on pleasing the people rather than solving the problem. In harsh reality, this must be true due to the fact that these people who practice this kind of logic are the problem makers themselves.

 

It was in the afternoon of the 25th of September when Senator Jinggoy Estrada explained his self and explained matters in his way that he claimed that will enlighten the people of what really is going on. Basically, what he was ranting about are the injustices that they, together with Senators Enrile and Revilla, had been receiving from different institutions such as the Media, Commission on Audit, Department of Budget and Management, and the Blue Ribbon Committee of the Senate.

 

To ease ourselves in catching up with the flow of this blog, I decided to divide it into parts, parts according to the institutions that Sen. Estrada claimed to have received injustices from:

 

(a) Media

 

‘…to demonize me…’

‘…to vilify us before the bar of public opinion.’

 

Senator Estrada started stating the prejudices and biasness of the Media through reiteration of some of the headlines regarding the scandals circulating the issue about the Priority Development Assistance Fund (PDAF). His point at the end of the day is actually simple: to be considered innocent until proven guilty. He claimed that what’s clearly happening is that they are being held under trial by publicity. Even more, the senator brought about the stand of the Commission on Human Rights with regards to this issue; technically claiming through the involvement of the CHR, that their rights are being violated through such process. This may be true, but let us not forget about them being the public servants of our nation. Let us always take into consideration that added pressure to them are not taken to be against them but something that must not be placed in account the most possible way these acts of media could be held tolerable. I hope that they possess the heart of a real public servant that always prioritize the betterment of the people they are serving and the improvement of the integrity of the political system of the country so that more people may benefit from the fruits of dedicated sincere public servant-hood in the country rather than decisions that are anchored on the opinions of the people to ensure their stay in power, and even more, their victory in the far 2016 elections. May our politicians start to think that victory in politics is anchored on good public leadership and not popularity and I know this could be achieved with the participation coming from the voters wherein they may learn to scrutinize the candidates and depend on real credentials and potentials and not on personality politics.

 

(b) Commission on Audit

 

“We believe that we have been specifically singled out by the COA”

Further,

 

 “No COA audit report of whatever nature shall be released to any person until a copy of said report has been officially transmitted to and received by the head of the government agency being audited. The purpose hereof is to give officials adversely affected in the report with sufficient opportunity to explain their side and also to ensure that no fact or data material to the audit finding is omitted in the report.”

 

I really find it funny how our politicians are well prepared in ensuring the protection of their selves, in terms of popularity and legality. How provisions that heaven knows were intended for the use of those people whom heaven knows created the provisions themselves have been presently available with just the right mix of words to protect the politicians when emergency calls. I am not saying that this was really what these provisions are intended for, what I am simply trying to say is that they really are well-trained people in their field.  

 

(c) Department of Budget and Management

 

“Mr. President, even DBM Sec. Florencio Abad’s text message warning that there will be no releases to certain congressmen if they did not vote in favor of impeaching former ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez was very much publicized and confirmed by a number of lawmakers. As expected, Sec. Abad had to deny that he sent those text messages.

 

At noong kasagsagan ng debate sa sin tax bill, ginoong pangulo, naisulat din sa mga pahayagan na nag-aalok ang secretary ng presidential legislative liaision office of PLLO sa mga kongresista ng release o mga SARO para ma-ipasa ang panukalang batas na iyon. I voted against this, kaya wala akong SARO dito. Ganoon din ang mainit na balita noong tinatalakay ng kongreso ang kontrobersyal na Reproductive Health Bill again, I voted against this measure, kaya wala po akong SARO.

 

Hindi na tuloy nakapagtataka ng kumalat ang balita na ang mga kongresista at mga senador ay inalok din ng PDAF para siguraduhin ang impeachment at conviction ng dating hukom ng korte suprema.”

In this part, I wasn’t surprised to know that these discretionary funds released to legislators may have been used for the interests of the President. If one must find the difference between the constraints of budget releases from the Arroyo administration compared to the Aquino administration is that the former releases in discretion to those who maintains loyalty and support for her tenure while the latter is said to release in accordance to the legislator’s decision to whether support or not, the forwarded bill of the president that is claimed to be for the betterment of the society and of the government. In short, the former deals with security of power while the latter deals with security of law enactments, laws that are clamored by the people themselves.

 

(d) Blue Ribbon Committee

 

I decided not to place any of the parts from the privilege speech for this part of my blog due to the ease of mind setting of what to expect that will appear in this part of the said speech.

 

I want to conclude everything here. Nothing’s new from this speech, it is not a statement sent to answer every problem of the country, not even one. This is a mere statement in which a senator in hot water is deeming salvation from the pointy eyes of the media, the commission, the department and his colleagues whom he claim is nothing different than him.

 

The people who provided power to these people have nothing to see here. Well, unless if you would want to see another common speech of a politician firing to anyone at will without placing his logical plan on how steps could be taken for this problem.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s