I personally do not like Senator Antonio Trillanes. That Oakwood mutiny he led was clearly an act of destabilization that put civilians’ lives at risk. His position on the reproductive health bill then was one taken from the Dark Ages and I repeatedly criticized him over this. His arrogant and abrasive manner turns people off.
While I find myself agreeing with Trillanes’ position on certain issues, I have never openly sided with him except now when he is being subjected to political persecution.
President Rodrigo Duterte is out to kill dissent, and with this, our democracy. Dissent, or opposing opinions, is necessary for democracy to thrive. Critics are needed for a healthy exchange of ideas and a more informed and hopefully, analytical citizenry. Critics are there to check possible and ongoing abuse. We are a nation of citizens, not robots programmed to do things.
Citizens have the capacity to think and the freedom to express views even if these run counter to what officials in government want to hear. The sacred freedom of expression is guaranteed by our Constitution. It is what keeps democracy alive. If you remove this, democracy dies.
The Trillanes case is the latest of this administration’s moves to silence critics, no matter who they are.
Senator Leila de Lima remains in prison for trumped-up charges linking her to illegal drugs. Her big “sin” against Duterte is the fact that as Justice secretary, she investigated the then Davao City Mayor for the alleged Davao Death Squad used to kill perceived criminals. As a senator, De Lima has been a staunch critic of the now President Duterte. Her incarceration has limited her capacity to perform her duties as a senator and also her voice as a Duterte critic.
Former Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno was removed from office over a quo warranto petition alleging that her appointment as Justice of the Court was “void ab initio” because of missing Statements of Assets and Liabilities. This was after the House of Representatives failed to come to a decision on the impeachment complaint against Sereno despite processing the same for months. Apparently, Solicitor Calida found a “better” albeit, illegal (in the eyes of many lawyers) way to remove Sereno via a quo warranto petition. It was easier because after all, Duterte had, and still has, the numbers in the Supreme Court.
Sereno is known to have a mind of her own. She was not a Duterte appointee and, therefore, owed nothing to Duterte. She went against the President, and even criticized his pronouncements, several times. She was an independent and Duterte would not tolerate her. He already had the numbers in the SC but perhaps he needed and wanted the High Court’s Chief Magistrate to be on his side. After all, it is public knowledge that Duterte wants former senator Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos as his vice president. The SC acting as the Presidential Electoral Tribunal is presently processing Marcos’ petition of fraud during the 2016 elections against Vice President Leni Robredo.
Many are of the opinion that the ultimate goal is to remove VP Leni. Now that Sereno is out and De Castro, a known Duterte ally, is in as CJ for two months, maybe those who want Leni dislodged from her position think that this can happen.
In Trillanes’ case, we again hear the phrase “void ab initio” or void from the beginning. President Duterte issued Proclamation No. 572 dated Aug. 31 revoking the amnesty given to the senator for being “void ab initio”. The claim is Trillanes did not apply for amnesty, and that he did not admit guilt for the Oakwood incident. The application paper is nowhere to be found according to a certification from the Armed Forces of the Philippines dated Aug. 30.
Why Trillanes? He is another strong critic of the Duterte administration. From Day One, Trillanes has accused the President of having hidden bank deposits, and has repeatedly challenged him to sign a waiver so his bank transactions could be scrutinized. Duterte has consistently rejected this challenge.
Trillanes is also leading the Senate Committee on Civil Service’s investigation on the legality of Solicitor General Jose Calida’s security company’s contracts with government offices. Calida’s family-owned Vigilant Investigative and Security Agency Inc. was found to have contracts with various government agencies reportedly worth P261.39 million. Calida’s family has asked the SC to issue a Temporary Restraining Order against the Senate probe but has failed to get one as of this writing.
Therefore, Calida has an ax to grind against Trillanes. According to the AFP, it was the SolGen who requested confirmation from them that the senator’s application form was missing. Remember that Calida was also behind the quo warranto petition against Sereno, and even earlier, the revocation of Rappler’s registration with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Trillanes case, however, may be difficult for Duterte and his allies because of the presence of evidence that the senator has filed an application, and admitted guilt which were the bases for the revocation of the amnesty. The event was heavily covered by media. Videos released by different media outfits showed Trillanes filing for amnesty and cameras even zoomed in on his application papers. He was then interviewed and even here, he admitted “general guilt.”
More than this, both the House of Representatives and Senate approved the resolutions granting amnesty to Trillanes. The Supreme Court has dismissed the petition questioning the amnesty’s legality, and the Makati Regional Trial Court under then Judge Rita Bascos Sarabia dismissed the case against Trillanes by virtue of the amnesty. In short, all the three branches of government were involved in the granting of this amnesty and everybody knows that the SC is the final arbiter when it comes to law.
Not a few lawyers and legislators have also weighed in on the issue and most if not all of those who have spoken said that the president cannot revoke an amnesty because the Constitution does not provide for this.
Presently, Trillanes is under the care of Senate President Tito Sotto. Duterte, for his part has said that he will wait for the warrant of arrest to be issued before moving in to get Trillanes from the senate. Trillanes, for his part has asked for a TRO from the SC.
The move to kill dissent is evident from the cases involving Senator De Lima, Rappler, former CJ Sereno, and now, Senator Trillanes. It is as if we are under martial law albeit undeclared. If this administration can do this to government officials and a media outfit, how easy will it be to silence ordinary critics? What else can the Filipino people take?
@bethangsioco on Twitter Elizabeth Angsioco on Facebook
