“The bad cop is relieved. Either the good cop realized at the last moment that he needed to move, or seeing that the numbers would fail to convict anyway, he decided not to move”
Now the pieces fall into place.
Over merienda with a senator in late February, I surmised that Chiz Escudero knew his politics when he decided not to convene the impeachment court “forthwith.”
The enemies of Inday Sara know that if trial were to commence in the middle of the campaign, the dice would eventually be loaded in favor of acquittal, I said then.
Look, I continued, the Dutertes have an electoral fortress in Mindanao. That is 24 percent of the vote. They have strong emotional ties with the Bisaya, and Cebu, Bohol, parts of Negros and Leyte put together is 10 percent of the vote.
A senatorial candidate, more so a re-electionist, will not want to lose in a third of the national vote, I calculated.
Seven re-electionists will most likely vote for acquittal. Add Robinhood, Jinggoy, Mark Villar, Zubiri, Alan, and it’s game over for the HoR’s impeachment.
So the wily Chiz steps up to the plate, and plays “bad cop.” We will not start trial until after the elections when the Alyansa with it’s sure winners trump the unknowns of Duterte.
And all the Duterte haters — yellows, pinks, commies, socialists, civil society ek-ekers, even traditional media pounced on Chiz.
But Chiz the whiz kid held the Duterte haters at bay, and initial surveys showed the Alyansa candidates would win against the virtual unknowns Davao managed to cobble.
Then Malacanang spoiled the best laid plan of bad cop.
Hatched in the middle of last year when the Uniteam cracked, with government quietly collaborating with the ICC prosecutor who was in hot water due to alleged sexual offenses, the former president was shanghaied by presidential plane to Den Haag mid-March.
The timing was so bad. The tide turned. Now Duterte’s “who they” candidates gained currency and locked-in one-third of the vote.
By mid-April, the signs of a meltdown were clear. The president’s sister ditched his coalition totally in favor of her friend Sara. The Nacionalista Villars hedged their bets. The yellow-pink candidates chose to be aloof in the fight of the reds and greens.
At one point, just to ensure the numbers to convict would be there, funds from mysterious and heretofore anti-pink sources found its way to two non-Alyansa candidates who were “sure” to vote for conviction.
By the skin of their teeth, the Alyansa managed to salvage five of its own. Two were likely to do as it bid, but three who won cannot be dictated upon.
Bad cop comes to the rescue once more. When the Senate finally convened as an impeachment court, his courtiers did another Houdini act: they “remanded” the articles to the HoR, and asked their “lower” counterparts to explain certain “kinks” in their procedures.
Those questions were earlier brought by the lawyers of the embattled vice-president before the highest tribunal. But the tribunal decided to let the elections pass before promulgating its decision, knowing what it writes would affect the elections.
Bad cop is really good at this kind of game.
He calculated that the Supreme Court would have to make a decision sooner than later, for he could not keep dribbling the impeachment ball forever, and every lawyer in town was looking at the “gods of Faura” to break the impasse.
But how about the good cop? He had just one new appointee in the Court, two appointees of PNoy, and a dozen by his immediate predecessor who was now in the confines of the ICC, unable to influence any official.
Did he, or his trusted lieutenant try to convince some justices? Only he could tilt the balance, if he had a mind to. Convincing the magistrates was above the pay grade of the bad cop.
But what happened?
On the eve of his fourth SONA, 13 justices voted along with the ponente, a PNoy appointee who declared the HoR-manufactured articles of impeachment as void ab initio, citing the one-year ban and the lack of proper disposition of three previous complaints frozen by the HoR’s unauthorized high clerk.
Even the newest justice, appointed just about a month ago, concurred with the ponente even if he could understandably have reason to abstain.
The bad cop is relieved. Either the good cop realized at the last moment that he needed to move, or seeing that the numbers would fail to convict anyway, he decided not to move.
Did he not after all, keep maintaining a hands-off stance, even saying he was against impeachment?
