SEARCH
Monitor archives:
Copyrighted material


Philippines Transfixed by Impeachment Drama

by Marites Sison

"It's a historic process, although, of course, he would have preferred not to be the center of it"
(IPS) MANILA -- The impeachment trial of Philippine President Joseph Estrada opened December 7, with prosecutors insisting that he violated his oath of office "like clockwork," and defense lawyers arguing that the move to oust him subverted the will of the Filipino people.

The arguments reflected high passions in this capital and the political instability rocking the country, two months after a provincial governor accused Estrada of accepting millions of dollars in kickbacks from illegal gambling.

Since then, however, what began as a corruption scandal around gambling has become a much wider controversy around Estrada, who has since been accused of amassing wealth to purchase a string of lavish houses to support his mistresses.

All of these charges are being discussed in the impeachment proceedings, which are likely to last anywhere from two months or even longer.

If impeached, Estrada, now in his second year of a six-year term, would be the first Filipino president to be booted out of office. He is already the first Asian head of state to face impeachment.

Last week critics and supporters of Estrada held large demonstrations outside the Senate building, the venue for the impeachment proceedings. There were face-offs of giant streamers and demonstrators, with one side screaming "Estrada Resign" and the other, "Estrada Remain."

Estrada himself was glued to the television set, watching the proceedings that were beamed live via satellite beginning 2PM, according to his press secretary Ricardo Puno.

"He was very interested. It's a historic process, although, of course, he would have preferred not to be the center of it," he said.

Today's proceedings began with opening statements that showed the prosecution saying Estrada violated his oath of office, and the defense banking on his much-vaunted popularity that brought him to the presidency.

Prosecutors pulled off a surprise by producing as evidence a check allegedly bearing Estrada's signature, which they said was used to buy a $1.74 million mansion that he could not have afforded based on his declared net income of $46,000.

Estrada not only violated the Constitution by concealing this property in his statement of assets and liabilities, but used "devious" means to acquire it, according to congressman Joker Arroyo, one of the prosecution lawyers for the House of Representatives which filed the impeachment case before the Senate in November.

Local media says the house in question reportedly belongs to Estrada and a mistress, a house that has been nicknamed "Boracay" after a Philippine island because it has a swimming pool with white sand and a wave machine. Estrada has denied owning the said property and said he was renting it.

Arroyo said Estrada took his oath of office swearing to "faithfully execute the laws of the land," but was the first to violate it. "Except for his name, he violated every word of his oath. That's why the House impeached him."


Estrada says elite are out to get him
Estrada is being impeached on four articles: bribery, graft and corruption, betrayal of public trust, and culpable violation of the Constitution.

The defense panel, for its part, chose to bring its case before the Filipino masses, who were largely responsible for bringing in the 40 percent mandate that Estrada got in the 1998 presidential elections.

Defense lawyer Estelito Mendoza delivered his statement in the local language Filipino, obviously playing to the sentiments of pro-Estrada supporters who largely belong to the rural and urban poor.

Mendoza argued that prosecutors have to prove Estrada "guilty beyond reasonable doubt" since he was elected by a reasonable margin of voters. "We are not here only to restore the dignity and integrity of President Estrada but to preserve the mandate of 10 million Filipinos who voted him as President," he said.

The prosecution panel has repeatedly stated that since it was an impeachment and not a criminal trial, a mere glimmer of guilt was enough to convict Estrada.

Mendoza also questioned the credibility of the prosecution panel's star witness Luis Singson, governor of northern Ilocos Sur province and an Estrada friend until he accused the president of receiving gambling kickbacks in October.

In the final analysis, however, the outcome of the trial -- the first such proceeding against an Asian head of government -- is more political than criminal in nature.

Much depends on the political alliances in the Senate, where a two-thirds vote of the 22-member chamber is needed for impeachment.

Aware of this, Estrada's camp has been working hard to court the sympathy among the poorer segments of society, hoping to get public sentiment to swing senators' votes toward an acquittal.

"We may have lost Manila," said Puno. "But if Manila thinks he's history, they're making a big mistake. The poor still don't believe he should resign. They still want him in office."

With his presidency hanging in the balance, Estrada has in recent weeks been making the rounds of urban and rural poor communities, igniting a form of class war by saying it is only the elite who are out to get him.

"He knows that his only ace is to keep the support of the masses," said Karina David, who resigned as Estrada's housing secretary last year.

Estrada's allies are also saying that though Estrada's having mistresses makes news headlines, it is not an issue for the poor.

"There were never any secrets about his shortcomings and tendencies from the very beginning and people still voted for him. The question of immorality is irrelevant," he said. "There are other world leaders infected with the same problems."

The issue of Estrada supposedly having accepted payoffs from the illegal lottery called "jueteng" also does not hold water for many of the poor, some political analysts and columnists concede.

"Many of the poor argue that most of our officials are crooks anyway, so why should we treat Estrada any differently?" writer Ellen Tordesillas said in her column in the English-language daily Malaya.

The poor also accept Estrada's argument that he never took any money that belonged to the people -- the gambling money, he says, remains intact in the bank account of a foundation that he says he did not know received the funds.

In any case, says Estrada supporter Martin Mercado, taking "jueteng" money does not constitute an offense because it does not involve stealing directly from public coffers.

But whatever the arguments, the impeachment trial has once again divided this nation, which 14 years ago had overthrown the dictator Ferdinand Marcos, and is now putting the country's democratic maturity to test.



Comments? Send a letter to the editor.

Albion Monitor December 11, 2000 (http://www.monitor.net/monitor)

All Rights Reserved.

Contact rights@monitor.net for permission to use in any format.