Democracy is not always the Voice of God

A so-called democratic government is not perfect but it is more favourable than a tyrannical dictatorship. The real essence of democracy must prevail as the majority of the populace wishes. This is the main purpose of the election process. Right or wrong after that said day as more majority shall prevail. If the right or wrong decision of the majority is the subject of the judgement, we will know after the term of office.

Since time and memorial, the basis of electing leaders here in our nation is transactional compounded with personality and not analytical. Transactional for the reason that people elect officials base on favours that could be return and compounded with personality on the basis that such candidates are either relatives or popular. On the other hand, when we say analytical, electing leaders should be base on principles and abilities of such to honestly serve the constituents. All the elections, gave us the opportunity to change this wrong habit but apparently it did not happen and just basically repeating history. The candidates that have the qualification and intellect were defeated by even more popular candidates lacking experience, intellect or ability. With this, we can call democracy as democrazy.

In a Christian dominated country like the Philippines, the most important teachings of the Bible are the supremacy of God in the kingdom of man. The Bible clearly teaches that God changes times and seasons.   God sets up kings. God removes them from power.  The wisdom of those who are wise comes from him. God gives knowledge to those who have understanding. (Daniel 2:21) Furthermore, this is the decision of the alert and watchful angels. So then, let all people everywhere know that the Supreme God has power over human kingdoms and that God can give them to anyone that God chooses—even to those who are least important. (Daniel 4:17). God cannot deceive and God cannot lose. God puts and eliminates the kings. The victory of any candidate does not mean that it is the will of God. This is the will of the people. God created man with freedom of choice and respect the freedom of God.

During elections, we always hear the saying in Latin, "Vox populi, VOX DEI," or 'the voice of the people is the voice of God.' This election overuse saying maybe not exactly politically correct but biblically right. The voice of the people may not always reflect the voice of God. The people paid no attention to Samuel, but said,   No! We want a king, so that we will be like other nations, with our own king to rule us and to lead us out to war and to fight our battles.  Samuel listened to everything they said and then went and told it to the Lord. (1 Sam. 8:19-21) But it worked out nicely the reign of Saul. Removed him and replaced his appointed king. In this story the voice of the people are not expressions of the voice of God.

Let us look at another biblical story, when Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. “I am innocent of this man’s blood,” he said. “It is your responsibility!”   All the people answered, “His blood is on us and on our children!”  Then he released Barabbas to them. But he had Jesus flogged, and handed him over to be crucified.  (Matthew 27:24-26).

It is not a Biblical premise that the majority is right or the minority is wrong. “Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life and only a few find it. (Matthew 7:13-14)

Democracy at the time of the prophet Samuel has resulted in predicaments. Democracy at the time of Pilate also brought more frictional predicaments. Democracy is great if the practice of freedom is within the dimensions of righteousness. For example, does it make sense for Israel to seek the king that is not yet ready to rule the dominion? Is it righteous for the Pilate to sentence to death a person without sin or a crime simply because the public wants? Will it be correct and morally sound to give the leadership of our country to someone who lacks the experience, qualification, intellect, morality and ability? That's democracy, as long as the quantitative majority rules even if qualitative minority have the sense of the right direction they are still to be considered as Rejects of the Democratic Process.

Unreasonable risk to democracy is the wrong that can be considered right or correct based on the decision numerical supremacy. And the right may be considered wrong because it is not popular. A democracy that lacks sense and define reasons will always result to political and economic tragedies. The practice of democracy should be on the border of righteousness that is guided by principles and idealisms. Thus, reasonable minority is much stronger than the more popular decision of the majority.

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

National President

1st Philippine Pro-Democracy Foundation, Inc.

drteope@yahoo.com

Dealing with an Office Gossip

Can you keep a secret?

The Merriam-Webster dictionary defines a gossip as “a person who habitually reveals personal or sensational facts about others”. Gossips often use stories or information about others as a method to gain power in interpersonal circles. They think that if they are always in the “know” then there is a good likelihood that others will seek them out for additional information. Another motive for the gossip is to use the manipulation of information to get situations “stirred up” and enjoy watching the show. This gives the gossip a sense of power and influence that they have not been legitimately been granted. Consider the gossips you know…aren’t they often people without real power in your community or workplace? 

This behaviour can be very destructive, not just to the individual who is the target, but also to the organization or community as a whole. It serves to confuse not clarify; to hurt not help. Because gossip typically involves rumour and inference rather than public fact it is difficult to refute or undo. Try the following:

• The best way to deal with a gossip is by not engaging in the gossip process yourself. You need to stand up to the gossip directly. Let the person know that you are not interested in these kinds of conversations about another person. Stop the chain.

• If the gossip is offering vague inferences or rumours, then insist he or she clarify and provide concrete, specific information that can be confirmed. Typically, this expectation for accountability will make them uncomfortable and they will stop. They will recognize that you rely on shared and relevant facts, not incidental slander.

• If you discover you are the victim of a gossip, it is best deal with them directly. Inform the person what you understand that they have been saying about you. Tell them that any information about you is yours to share and that you find gossiping to be dishonest and disrespectful. Avoid becoming aggressive or defensive, and do not feel obliged to provide any details or clarification about the information being spread.

• Finally, try your best to reinforce the gossip for legitimate actions at work. Pat him or her on the back for work related actions that deserve appropriate recognition, as this will enable the gossip to find value and power in a real sense. Over time they will learn the kind of behaviour and interaction that are accepted by you and others.

It is likely that others feel as you do, but they may be afraid to speak their mind as they think the gossip may turn on them. They need to know that if you are being firm with the gossip that it will give them confidence to do the same.  Your behaviour will enhance your reputation and help set an emotional and ethical climate at work. A plant can only grow in the right conditions – the right soil, the right light. Your actions determine if the gossip “grows” in your workplace. You determine whether the gossip has the right conditions. If you and your co-workers allow the gossip to continue without addressing it, you have contributed to its growth.  (Gilbert Acton Ltd 2006)

Force to Resign or Impeach

The impeachment trial is really a show that the Filipino people are now watching every day. It seems that some are entertained, amused, educated, laughed, and stupefied. By the way, annotators from different made their commentaries, as if we are watching a boxing show. The punches and counter-punches of the prosecution and the defense team are sometimes lethal and sometimes foul. Both party, would like to knockout each other as early as the first round. The referees and judges of the fight as per observation by some parties seem to have a bet as early as now. Thus, it goes to the point that objectivity of the jurors will be considered if ever the fight goes to distance.

If you were an objective critical thinking spectator, maybe you can have your own analysis about the prosecutions delivery of argument and the defense presentation of the rule of law. But, sadly to say not all our countrymen are trained to critically think and objectively judge. The manner on how our day-to-day lives are manipulated by the concept of idiotization of the giant media networks. This is manifested on how our electorate decides in choosing the leaders of our Nation. On that point, perception on how the electorate choose our leaders manifest also the way on how they voice their opinions on issues confronting the nation.

The present system for one at this point in time creates a perception among the idiotized majority. Idiotized majority in a way,

• that these people were made to believe that President is popular based on 1000 respondents representing 91 Million Filipinos,
• that these people were also given false hopes that for them to climb up out of poverty is fall in line in game show that gives thousand and millions of pesos,
• that people were given the impression that there is no terrorism despite the beheading of nineteen soldiers in Basilan, and the sporadic ambushes and killings of military personnel and some civilian sympathizers by CPP/NPA/NDF and MILF,
• that people were made to believe that by watching these giant networks, they can forget the predicaments in their daily lives,
• that these people made to understand that electing the popular rather that the credible would uplift their lives,
• that people were given false hope that for them to be Millionaire, they need to bet on LOTTO, while some PSCO officials were using the government funds in a questionable manner as investigated by the Senate in their inquiries, and
• that these people were blinded in the reality of the “matuwid na daan”, despite the numerous unconstitutional decisions and blunders such as the giving of financial aid to the enemies of the state and the recent railroading of the Corona impeachment.

Those are the only few manifestation that we can say that an idiotized majority is existing, for sure I know that you can add some in the enumerated above. But among those that I enumerated, the last item is indeed very alarming, specifically the Corona Impeachment.

At present, some bias and paid media were evangelizing the manifestation that Corona is a thorn to national development for the reason that he is a puppet of the previous administration. But, will that be enough to crucify him. The answer is No, which is why the 188 Speed Reading Congressmen, signed an Impeachment Complaint with Eight Articles of Impeachment, stating numerous allegations that the Chief Justice must be remove from office for he has no moral ascendancy to head the Judiciary.

During the impeachment trial, I was surprised when the prosecution opted to present Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment instead of Article 1. The defense team objected but as usual a partisan Senate would not like to hear arguments of law, logic and common sense. The ruling is to continue with the presentation of evidences and witnesses based on Article 1. When these witnesses were presented to the court, there goes the manifestation that many Senator-Judges seems to be not objective anymore. The request of the first witness who is the Clerk of Court of the Supreme Court to ask permission from the Supreme for her to turn-over the Statement of Asset, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALN) on the premise that there is an existing resolution in the office where she is connected prohibiting the disclosure of the (SALN) without due permission. Circuses of arguments among the Senator-Judges were delivered just to make a point that the witness must turn-over the said SALN. There is one Senator who states that the Impeachment Court is much supreme than that of the Supreme Court during Impeachment Trials. Lot of laughs among the intellectual few on that statement. Comedy indeed is happening in the impeachment trial. The only Senator-Judge that I notice who is really a statesman is Senator Joker Arroyo. He asked for one day only just for the witness to be given a chance to ask permission from the Supreme Court in order not to come up a dilemma of a Battle Royale between the two branches of government. He even manifest that there is a pending petition in the Supreme Court to stop the Impeachment Trial due to many legal points and argument. But sadly to say again, such manifestation was not taken into consideration by his bias colleagues. From then on, other witnesses were presented by the prosecution, and as always objections were raised by the defense team, and as usual it is always overruled.

On the observation of the some critically thinking Filipinos, it seems that the prosecution is not ready on their evidences on all the Articles of Impeachment. The obvious manifestation is when they opted to start with Article 2 instead of Article 1. But when they present Article 2 they were caught in their negligence. The prosecution team even state that it is the first time that they see that SALN of the Chief Justice. These 188 Congressmen subscribed and sworn that the Chief Justice based on the Article 2 of the Articles of Impeachment which states that,

Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under Section. 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.

How can these 188 Congressmen subscribed and sworn on this allegation when their fellow Congressman states during the trial that it is their first time to see the SALN. These congressmen do commit perjury by signing the impeachment complaint. Simple common sense will tell us that they cannot manifest that the Chief Justice failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth, when they themselves haven’t seen the SALN of the Chief Justice.

In a simple search for a conclusion on this phenomenon based on the above stated premises, the way how the prosecution behaved in the court and in media, it seems that the architect of this Corona impeachment thing failed in his true objective. The real objective as per my simple analysis is not to bring Corona to the impeachment court. But, rather to force Chief Justice to resign his post, the mastermind of this plot did not expect that the Chief Justice will fight to the end. They misread Chief Justice Corona as a weak public servant that will be bothered by the different bombs against him in media, insulting and maligning his family. This is the reason why the prosecution does employ the dirty tactic of having the family of the Chief Justice to be in the witness stand in order to add more mental suffering to the Chief Justice, hoping that he will resign if he saw his family member being insulted thru cross-examination by the prosecution. But, it didn’t happen the impeachment court denied the prosecution’s motion to subpoena the Corona family members based on legal doctrines.

As obvious, people will really notice that they are not ready in the impeachment trial. They wrongly foresee that the Chief Justice would resign out of emotional pressures and public ridicule to his name thru media and public perception. The mainstream giant media networks have already convicted the Chief Justice even before the start of the impeachment trial. The prosecution even hired private lawyers to represent the prosecution team. This is really a clear expression by the prosecution that they lack the legal armory to pin down the Chief Justice.

Now, that the impeachment trial is in progress, the question is, how will the prosecution sustained the damage they have done due to their wrong foresight that the Chief Justice will resign? Can they dig more evidences to justify all their allegations in the eight articles of impeachment? So many questions will be raised out on this turn of events. The miscalculated move of this impeachment brouhaha have backfired to these 188 Congressmen, specifically the members of the prosecution team, which is obviously using this impeachment trial as their jumping board for re-election or aspiration to a higher position. We really do not know what will happen next; specifically there are exposes about Jose Maria Sison return to our country, the rumored revolutionary government, the documented creeping communist invasion, the Mindanao sub-state and so on. But for sure, the result of this impeachment trial is that there are no winners, all are loser. The question is who is the BIGGEST LOSER?

The Filipino Nation is the BIGGEST LOSER. The Filipino People that everyday are worrying where to get the food that they will eat. But sadly to say, the idiotized majority is just open to the old statement BAHALA NA. While the Telenovela of the giants networks conditioned the mind of the idiotized majority to wait for a week or day for the next episode. That is why in this CORONAVELA, we do not know what would be the outcome and moves of this government. Filipino spectators would only be advised to see what would happen. ABANGAN ANG SUSUNOD NA KABANATA…

Dr. Rodolfo John Ortiz Teope

National President

1st Philippine Pro-Democracy Foundation, Inc.

drteope@yahoo.com

Good Congressmen to Expose Evil Chief Justice?

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke

In just a wink of an eye, the quote by Edmund Burke which I heard in a TV station who happens to own a monopoly of business in our country, ironically enough it was the same week that a group of Congressmen of this nation delivered their statements on TV stating that they already impeach a very corrupt, irresponsible and unqualified Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, in the person of Renato Corona. The Burke quotation and the statement of these Congressmen did not collide in my mind until I started thinking about a part of the statements, that not only was the most ridiculous statement a person could ever make but perhaps one of the most dangerous statements ever spoken.

Democracy aside, there were a couple of things on the Congressmen’s statements that have to be noted. On one hand, the Congressmen was welcome and applauded by the people on who really likes to kiss their ass for the reason of survival, but still in their statements they terrorized the judicial branch of the government, as well as the dignity of their chamber where they are elected, whereby the magical impeachment case which I called as the CORONA PHENOMENON was expeditiously signed by 188 Congressmen, in record time, without any due process and deliberation, the Chief Justice was impeached in the House of Representatives, in the most horrible fashion I have ever witnessed on media. They were insulting, rude and demeaning to a forum wherein the advocacy itself is focus on promotion of justice and triumph of good over evil.

On the other hand, Congressmen made a few statements that made me pause and think. The statement manifesting that the impeachment process is a healthy practice of democracy to the Filipino people. Nothing new here, we all knew that. And while he was somewhat polite in his approach on the subject it was not news. Other factors of their statements worth noting is when they stated that them and their country, will not wait to be given the tools needed to have an objective and clean justice system. My shocking thoughts, what is their authority and wisdom to come up with such a statement. They believe that it is their right to develop and progress like every other nation in the world. The President for them deserves to appoint a Chief Justice that will truly work for the development of the nation.

Another noteworthy moment was when the leader of the Congressmen discussed the merit and evidences of the impeachment, even if the Senate impeachment court is not yet convene to start hearing the case, as if this Congressman, who according to the Senate President must study law further. Maybe such early presentation of evidence would mindset the people thru media that the Chief Justice is indeed guilty. The fact that the defense panel is a group of high caliber lawyers, not to mention the petitions of independent minded lawyers to stop the impeachment process based on irregularities and technicalities.

But still with the tough tasked to face this 188 Congressmen stand on their ground that eloquently understand the eight grounds for impeachment, enumerated as follows:

I. Respondent betrayed the public trust through his track record marked by partiality and subservience in cases involving the Arroyo administration from the time of his appointment as Supreme Court justice which continued to his dubious appointment as a midnight chief justice and up to the present.

II. Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution and/or betrayed the public trust when he failed to disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under Section. 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution.

III. Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution and betrayed the public trust by failing to meet and observe the stringent standards under Article VIII, Section 7 (3) of the Constitution that provides that “[A] member of the judiciary must be a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence” in allowing the Supreme Court to act on mere letters filed by a counsel , which caused the issuance of flip-flopping decisions in final and executory cases; in creating an excessive entanglement with Mrs. Arroyo through her appointment of his wife to office; and in discussing with litigants regarding cases pending before the Supreme Court.

IV. Respondent betrayed the public trust and/or committed culpable violation of the Constitution when it blatantly disregarded the principle of separation of powers by issuing a “status quo ante” order against the House of Representatives in the case concerning the impeachment of then Ombudsman Merceditas Gutierrez.

V. Respondent committed culpable violation of the Constitution through wanton arbitrariness and partiality in consistently disregarding the principle of res judicata and in deciding in favor of gerrymandering in the cases involving the 16 newly-created cities, and the promotion of Dinagat Island into a province.

VI. Respondent betrayed the public trust by arrogating unto himself, and to a committee he created the authority and jurisdiction to improperly investigate an alleged erring member of the Supreme Court for the purpose of exculpating him. Such authority and jurisdiction is properly reposed by the Constitution in the House of Representatives via impeachment.

VII. Respondent betrayed the public trust through his partiality in granting a temporary restraining order (TRO) in favor of former President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and her husband Jose Miguel Arroyo in order to give them an opportunity to escape prosecution and to frustrate the ends of justice, and in distorting the Supreme Court decision on the effectivity of the TRO in view of a clear failure to comply with the conditions of the Supreme Court’s own TRO.

VIII. Respondent betrayed the public trust and/or committed graft and corruption when he failed and refused to account for the judiciary development fund (JDF) and special allowance for the judiciary (SAJ) collections.

Here is where the evil comes in. If they are really good people that do something so that evil will not triumph, I just like to ask back the questions to them about the grounds of betrayal of public trust.

• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen did not practice midnight appointment among their preferred people, when they were not yet legislators, when they were heads of executive departments, GOCCs, Local Government officials?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen disclose to the public his statement of assets, liabilities, and net worth as required under Section. 17, Article XI of the 1987 Constitution?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen is a person of proven competence, integrity, probity, and independence?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen is really independent and cannot be influence by the leadership of the executive department?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen is not receiving kickbacks and commissions from contractors when they are utilizing their Pork Barrel?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen have bought their houses, cars, condominiums, out of their own sweat and not thru corruption?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen did not lobby for a TRO in the judicial department on some cases involving their men and close relatives?
• Who among these 188 so-called good Congressmen did not lobby for positions in the executive department to designate their people in vital offices?

If all these 188 so-called good Congressmen would answer NO, then I say, go on with advocacy, clean this Nation, and save us from evil men? On the other hand, when these 188 so-called good Congressmen signed the impeachment complain, there was an outburst of laughter from the few principled Filipino. The educated body of people who read the complaint knew the absurdity of the statement but the numerous laughter didn’t take into account the ramifications of the whole thought.

Now how does the theater of good men step up and take a stand for the people in our nation who cannot stand up for themselves. The 188 Congressmen of this country cannot face their own mirror before filing a complaint. We pray that the citizens of our country can set themselves free of such narrow minded and uneducated thinking of our some elected Congressmen. And we must pray that many will not suffer under the regime of self-interest before national interest. Perhaps evil will triumph when good men cannot do anything through no fault of their own but through the fault of those in power who reject reason and wisdom. History has shown us these before in the leadership of demented and closed minded dictators of the past.But, the question is, do we still have a Good Men in the Government that will do something so that evil will not triumph. Face the mirror and ask yourself.