"Trial by Publicity"

It only takes for good men to do nothing, for evil to prosper.

--- Edmund Burke ---

When the first magistrate of the highest court in the land has a questionable constitutional appointment and lacks popular legitimacy in the eyes of the many, when a special prosecuting official charged with holding public officials accountable for their action's odds of conviction (winning cases) is no more than twenty percent, in a country where it takes years to indict public officials and arraign them for committing acts of treason against the people and their money, one should not be surprised if the people take matters into their own hands and give their imprimatur on the so called "trial by publicity."

Public Service and Courage

I find it hard to comprehend the gall of some public officials who, by their own words, admitted stealing the people's money but do not expect to take responsibility for the consequences of their actions. These public officials will then cry foul and assert their constitutional rights and rely on the ever so slow and grinding wheel of justice, a legal system with so few judges, the Filipino people had the opportunity to witness one recuse himself because he was too afraid of taking a high profile and publicly scrutinized case.

In a country where the family holds a preeminent place even in the letters of the constitution, it is a proper excuse to recuse oneself from public service when circumstances threatens the life and limb of the public official and his family.

But what about the Filipino nation, sir? Do you know what harm you have caused? If judges can excuse themselves from public service when it is not convenient for them and the public allows such reason to hold, how can we expect other public officials to fulfill, with courage and determination, their SWORN DUTY to serve?

If it is inconvenient for politicians to act in the public's best interest, can't they say "well, I need to recuse myself from holding myself accountable when it comes to the people's money. After all, if other public officials can do it, why can't I?"

Due Process is meaningless if citizens acting as temporary delegates of their fellow citizens do not adhere to and does not have the courage to fulfill their sworn duty.

A public official's oath of office becomes "traditional," in the sense that officials do it for the sake of ceremony and pageantry: a mere preference for "making things official" and the feel good sensation it provides.

Honor vs. Reputation (Good Name)

A soldier's death in battle is one of the most honorable sacrifices a citizen can give to his country. But dying to save one's "honor" (I take it this means REPUTATION or GOOD NAME in Philippine English) is quite different.

It is dishonorable to take one's life if living means providing sworn statement that may help reduce the country's graft and corruption. By taking one's life, a great disservice has been done to the Filipino nation; the efforts to exorcise tolerance of a culture of corruption has lost a credible witness who has decided that his "honor" was found wanting.

As a matter of faith, it is a sin to take our own lives regardless of whether it is for the sake of escaping responsibility, public ridicule, and even deflecting what may possibly be an undeserved public shame (how are we to know the truth, now that he is dead?) upon one's family.

A life not guided by our beliefs, but what is convenient,(or has turned away from it) will be weak and exhausted because one cannot hold onto truth, the foundation upon which we are set free regardless of any powers that tries to limit our capacity and potential, be it family, tradition or public pressure, letting our minds be ravaged by the relentless criticism of oneself... our conscience.

In a culture where "guilt by association" holds true and a good name is everything, it is reasonable for individuals to think one's life is of less value.

But what I find hard to understand is if a good name is most important, why do we continuously associate with questionable individuals; why do we abide by, adhere and subscribe to the way these individuals act, which is to say the least, questionable?

Resign from your position! Public service is not only possible by enlisting, getting elected or appointed. Holding others accountable is not limited to becoming a politician, a judge or a soldier. How naive of those who think truth-telling is not public service. Small minds and traditionalists would make that mistake, no doubt.

Honor, in the realm of public service, is a reward the people give to deserving public servants. It is public acclamation bestowed only by the people, not some physical representations of commendations awarded by high public officials which one can accumulate overtime (such as plaques and medals).

It can be taken away even in the late years of a public servant's life, if the people so chooses. The public may be cruel and heartless, even tyrannical. But there is no reason to aspire and to hold democracy as dear if the people is not to rule, and who, as all are imperfect, can sometimes be tyrannical.

Hence, for public officials who likes the idea of and worship having a good name as more important than life itself, that is, more important than divine command to value life, then whenever you make a decision or make policy, keep in mind, above all else, that the public must have a say at all times.

Unless, of course, one wants to be tried by the public.
~

Irreverence in the Media

Our papers have one peculiarity. . . They are irreverent toward pretty much everything, but where they laugh one good king to death, they laugh a thousand cruel and infamous shams and superstitions into the grave, and the account is squared. Irreverence is the champion of liberty and its only sure defense.

- Mark Twain, Notebook, 1888


If you expect news to always have and be told with a floppy, soft, cuddly, warm and pussy feeling, go work for a public relations firm. There, one may harness one's own bleeding-heart inclination and care-bear skills to your heart's content.

It is absurd to lead others, let alone ourselves, to believe that events are absent of wrong deeds; that is why news are told! To expose wrong and put it in the light: that others may see and prevent such thing from occurring again.

Commendable deeds are rewarded in private; sometimes, one needs to expose wrong for the good to exist. Also, one cannot rely on a news correspondent alone to set the tone of one's opinion. Hence, it is impossible to make an informed choice based on the article or report of one individual.

A mature news reader would confirm, through an independent research (preferably your own), the basis of the article and if necesary, determine how the article came to a conclusion. This adversarial demand ensures that information is not particularly tailored to favor a certain bias.

Burdensome it is not? Perhaps, it is this burden that makes the average individual neglect their duty as rational beings capable of choosing for their own what is appropriate or ought to be. It is something that only those capable of assuming the burden of citizenship may realize.

In any case, news media that focus on commendable deeds all the time ought to start considering whether it should provide their services to those who wish to only hear and see what they wish to hear and see.

One of the worst kind of censorship, some newspaper stick with "positive news" or news which is not offensive to the subject of the news even if the object of the news is to reveal the subject's abominable, offensive or unlawful actions.

Stay away from them. It is bad for an individual's ability to stay with reality. It is only recommended for those who see society without hope, that is, in limited and prescribed dosage.

Truth intentionally told in a passion which prohibits offending anyone is not truth. Half-baked truths will not set me free; it will only free me partially and half-heartedly.
~