The politicians in the Senate Electoral Tribunal could not vote against a fellow senator. It could have been camaraderie. Or it could have been political calculus. What if she just makes it to the presidency? But for one senator whose father was in the competition, they either did not have the heart to expel her from the Senate, or they chose to be “smart.” Better for others to do the “dirty” job of upholding the Constitution; not they.
The justices in the SET thought otherwise. To them, it was a case of the law, in fact, the fundamental law, that had to be upheld. Never mind the political fall-out, if any.
The Comelec was likewise swamped with similar cases questioning the senator’s eligibility to run for president of the land. Two issues were before them: whether she was a natural-born citizen, and whether she had satisfactorily complied with a 10-year residency prior to her would-be election. Both were requirements clearly spelled out in the Constitution.
Two weeks after she narrowly won her case by the vote of five politicians in the SET, a division of the Comelec unanimously ruled that she did not qualify. Ten days thereafter, the other division ruled against her by a vote of 2-1. While procedure calls for an en banc resolution, it is clear that five of seven would deem her not qualified to run for president.
The battle goes now to the highest tribunal. First the SET where she was deemed qualified was elevated by Rizalito David. Thereafter, the Comelec resolution that deems her unqualified will be raised by her lawyers to the Court.
Three justices who voted to strike her out as senator will likely inhibit themselves in the David appeal. But not in the Comelec ruling which her lawyers will appeal, especially since the issue of residency was stricken off the petition before the SET.
Why did she run for president at all?
Surely, she must have known about the legal impediments. Even if she is not a lawyer, she has a battery of them, beginning with her vice presidential partner, scholarly at the State University, mastered in international law at Georgetown, and a senator of the realm twice over.
What was it they advised her? That those legal impediments will be brushed aside because of her popularity? Because she was Numero Uno in the Senate race of 2013? Because she was the adopted daughter of the legendary FPJ, whose run for the presidency was so popular until stopped by the machination of “Hello Garci”?
And that because of all these, the Senate Electoral Tribunal would rule for her, including the justices therein? And the Comelec, despite their members having been recommended by one of her competitors and appointed by the patron of her competitor, would not dare rule against the “darling of the masses?’’
And that even if perchance they did, as long as her “sure to soar” numbers prevailed, even the Supreme Court would sustain her right to be president? Or, assuming the erudite members of the Court would tarry and dither, her “coronation” by the people come May 9, 2016, would render the tribunal’s ruling “moot and academic” on the “democratic” theory of “vox populi est vox Dei”?
So many “ifs,” so many “buts.” So many assumptions, so many variables.
If she had accepted the offer to be Mar’s vice president, would not the same cases have been filed? After all, the same Constitutional requirements for the presidency hold true for the vice presidency. But, perhaps the Comelec would be kinder. Maybe not the justices at the SET.
If she had contained her ambition, knowing fully well that there were serious constitutional impediments, and opted to serve her first term in the Senate until 2019, then ran for re-election she would surely win, wouldn’t she be qualified to run for president by 2022, as far as her residence is concerned? Maybe by then as well, she could have diligently produced a perfect DNA match to prove her natural-born status. Quietly, sans the glare of high public attention.
But no, on Sept. 17, after spurning the courtship of Mar and PNoy, she cast her die for the presidency.
Was she experienced enough for such a daunting task? She had a bit more than two years as the movie and television censor; she had two years as senator, during which she asked the right questions over the slaughter at Mamasapano, grilled an unpopular PNP chief who was the pet of the president, and rode an MRT train to experience the travails of the man on the street. Oh, and lest I forget, she got her fellow senators to approve of the freedom of information bill, even as the same languishes at the House of Representatives because the president is not that interested.
Was she experienced enough to take on the challenge of running a contentious, troubled, divided country of 104 million? Well, why not, she thought? If PNoy could run, and win, why could she not?
What motivates her? “Serving the people” is so “motherhood”; everybody and his mother intones the same with utmost solemnity.
Ambition? Or to redress the wrong committed against her adoptive father, who “won but lost” in the counting of 2004?
Did she agree with those who told her that she should “strike while the iron is hot”? That her popularity might have a lesser appeal by 2022? That whatever she does in the Senate for a term and a half would not be enough to sustain her present voter appeal?
Well, she listened to them. She did not divine their intentions enough.
And she listened to the heartstrings of her own ambition.
Not for her the humility of introspection: Am I prepared enough? Do I have a clear vision of what ought to be done? How do I explain to tribunals and the people why I renounced my Filipino citizenship once, took allegiance before a foreign country, and then again, discarded said foreign allegiance for the convenience of a government job which could well be the ticket to Olympian-height political office?
Of course she tells us all the fight ain’t over. That she has a will of steel.
I wonder if she has not thus far realized that she should not have listened to insincere, “user-friendly” advice. That she made a terrible miscalculation.
When her adoptive father was cheated, and the masses were angered, there was no lynch mob at the gates of the Palace. Does she expect a “revolt of the masses” before Comelec? Before the Supreme Court? Because her ambitions were denied?
Such an egregious miscalculation.