In 2011, I wrote in an Eagle Eyes column that the ultimate measure of a successful state of the nation address is whether the President in this annual address makes all of us—citizens of this country—feel good about our country. I asked then, writing about President Benigno Aquino III who was, like President Rodrigo Duterte last Monday, delivering his second Sona: “Did he unite as a people towards goals we, regardless of political views, share? Did he share a vision of where he wants to bring us, one so compelling that at the end of the speech, we all rise up wanting to march together to that destination?” I concluded in that column that negative answers to these questions means the Sona has failed and that a big opportunity for the country has been lost.
In a later column, in 2015, I also wrote that a good Sona should make us all rise up wanting to march together to where the president wants to bring the country. And even if I am not moved to march, I would like to at least miss a couple of heartbeats while listening to the Sona.
With regret, I have to say that President Rodrigo Duterte’s second Sona last Monday did not meet these expectations. If anything, the President delivered an angry speech (and press conference) with diatribes against real and imagined enemies—from mining companies to media, from Senator De Lima to Joma Sison to Chito Gascon, from human rights advocates to the communists. Duterte did not spare government officials and workers from his attacks, calling on top officials to eat at their desks, the implication being that they were lazy.
Most bothersome to me was the President’s attacks against many of our critical governance institutions: the Supreme Court, the Ombudsman, the Commission on Human Rights, and the Commission on Audit. He also embarrassed the European Union representatives as well as the Ambassador of the United States to the Philippines. Even the lumad, the most powerless and marginalized of groups were not spared; the President threatened to bomb their schools.
With even more regret, I have to conclude that the majority of the people seem to like the speech. Certainly, our legislators, senators and representatives alike, were certainly not bothered by it. Although there were no standing ovations, I counted more than 60 times when the President was interrupted with applause from his audience.
From a communication point of view, I can objectively say that Duterte’s second Sona was a virtuoso performance. If you include the theatrical act of going out to confront the rallyists after his speech, Duterte’s performance was definitely masterful. Like him or not, Duterte is effective in inciting his base and even neutrals. It was surreal though, his coming in and out of the prepared speech. I think he should just have an outline of the points he needs to make and just go extemporaneous next time.
On substance, there were good things. For sure, the time he spent on environment, climate change, and disasters is the longest ever in a Sona. I think he was over the top in his tirade against mining companies, maybe as a way of apologizing for letting them attack Gina Lopez. But he made very good points on climate change, land use, and disasters. It was great that he called for the passage of the land use act and the creation of a national disaster agency.
This time around, there was a semblance of a legislative agenda.
From his tirade against mining companies, one can extract a proposal for new mining law as Duterte clearly wants stricter environmental rules and new revenue and importation of raw minerals policies. The land use act, mentioned early in his speech, is long overdue. We need a new independent, and stand-alone disaster agency; many of us have advocated this for years now. A government reorganizing act is needed as change can only come if the bureaucracy is rightsized. It’s a no-brainer that procurement rules really have to be improved as they now paralyze decisions, obstruct development. And yes, we need tax reform, so long as it does not disadvantage the poor. Duterte singled out Senator Sonny Angara and even teasing and warning the latter about electoral consequences of the tax reform bill was not passed.
Finally, President Duterte asked for the reimposition of the death penalty, justifying it wrongly with an antiquated understanding of the Revised Penal Code. Among all the legislative proposals, this one I strongly oppose.
What surprised me was the President’s tepid endorsement of the Bangsamoro Basic Law and federalism; they were mentioned in passing and without enthusiasm. I am now less optimistic that both can be done. This is sad because martial law will not solve Marawi or terrorism; only political interventions like the BBL and constitutional change can address the roots of this challenge of extremist terrorists.
I thought the mention of the Balangiga bells, although many people have already been working on this for years, was a stroke of genius. But like many, I prefer our seas and shoals that China has taken to the bells. But alas, President Duterte was quiet about that.
Duterte’s attacks on many of our institutions during the Sona was worrisome. His tirades against media (Rappler, ABS, and Inquirer) were mentioned again can only have a chilling effect. The critique of Supreme Court TROs, even if he was courteous and polite to the Chief Justice, was uncalled for because the TRO issue is actually bogus. According to the Chief Justice, in a statement issued after the Sona, there is no such TRO against the RH law and the TRO on the two contraceptive implants can be lifted upon certification by the Food and Drug Administration that they are not abortifacient. His undermining of the Commission on Audit, the Ombudsman, and the Commission of Human Rights was terrible.
An angry president incites people against each other. Last Monday’s Sona did that.
There are of course real reasons why many of us are angry. Some are fundamental and rooted in serous causes like poverty and social injustice. But a big part of this anger is avoidable, a result of the manipulative politics of the Macapagal-Arroyo and Noynoy Aquino years when law was used for political goals. In 2010, I wished President Aquino, given his resounding mandate in 2010, would unify the country around reforms. But he did not; up to his last Sona, he still mentioned Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s failures. Today, Duterte, with a high satisfaction rating, have the opportunity to do the same—unify us—but clearly the Sona manifests a decision to take the divisive path.
How do I feel about the state of the nation? To put it frankly, not good.
Facebook: https://web.facebook.com/deantonylavs/ Twitter: tonylavs