Select the best answer. Crying Lady is:
a. Queen from Arthurian legend
b. Fictional Walt Disney character
c. Mountain range background of Lake Lanao
d. Wine glass swiping wife of state leader
e. None of the above
Best answer: e. None of the above.
Other answers: a. Lady Guinevere; b. Sleeping Beauty; c. Sleeping Lady; d. First Lady.
The above quiz, a hook in our catchy introduction, aims to attract the interest of the relatively younger millennials who had no clues of the world around them circa 1983.
During that year, the Crying Lady was Rebecca Quijano, the first civilian eyewitness of the shooting of Ninoy Aquino on the tarmac of Manila International Airport. A political critic of then-President Ferdinand Marcos Sr., Aquino just landed when he was shot in the head while being escorted to a waiting vehicle to transport him to prison.
“Are you sure it was Aquino?” asked reporters rushing toward Rebecca.
“They already killed Aquino; why are you not crying yet?” she replied triggering her Crying Lady moniker in news media then.
Suddenly, she was pulled backward, before she could say more.
“Don’t talk or you’ll get hurt,” someone told her.
Rebecca’s account was the strongest evidence offered by the prosecution in the Agrava Fact-Finding Board Commission in the investigation of the assassination of Ninoy Aquino. To instill fear among the eyewitnesses, Rebecca was singled out in public as she stepped off the plane.
“[The witnesses] have become convinced it would be unhealthy for them to speak out,” said Andres Narvasa, the board’s general counsel.
Four other witnesses’ appearances were canceled after they recanted their testimonies. After having learned the military was asking questions about her, Rebecca, with her family and friends, got so fearful she decided to keep quiet.
It’s a typical case of kill the chicken to scare the monkey. An old Chinese idiom, it refers to making an example out of someone to threaten others. According to an old folktale, a street entertainer earned a lot of money with his dancing monkey. One day, when the monkey refused to dance, the entertainer killed a live chicken in front of the monkey and then the monkey resumed dancing. (Wikipedia)
Such a tactic cast a long shadow over the administration then of President Rodrigo Roa Duterte (PRRD) that weaponized the legal system to persecute his political enemies as profoundly delineated in Inquirer’s Letter To The Editor by one netizen, Ancheta K. Tan.
Chicken A. Leila De Lima, former senator
“The prosecution of De Lima was so abhorrent that it triggered international condemnation from lawmakers and institutions of several countries, including the United States and the European Union.
“The filing of trumped-up drug trafficking charges against the former senator was nothing more than a malevolent act of political and personal vendetta because she had investigated the extrajudicial killings that occurred in Davao City when Duterte was a mayor. A drawn-out trial made sure that De Lima would be detained for almost seven years.”
Chicken B. Maria Lourdes Sereno, former Supreme Court chief justice
“Sereno’s removal from office was no less jarring in its implications on the rule of law. The copious rationale of the Supreme Court in its decision rendered on May 11, 2018, justifying the use of quo warranto to remove her, as opposed to the specific provision of the Constitution that a member of the Court “may be removed from office on impeachment” (Article XI, Section 2) remains inexplicable to this day.”
Chicken C. Antonio Trillanes IV, former senator
“]T]he most unforgivable lapse, if not ignorance, on the part of the Solicitor General Jose Calida, the ruling hinted, was that Proclamation No. 572 [which sought to revoke Trillanes’ amnesty granted by President Benigno Aquino III], did not have the concurrence of Congress, which [Calida] did not bother to get."
The above three high-profile legal cases fly in the face of the Department of Justice (DOJ) following statement:
“As a sovereign nation with a robust and functional justice system capable of addressing internal issues without external interference, the Philippine government has shown that it is ready, willing, and able to investigate and prosecute any crime committed within its territory.”
Indeed, the recent acquittal of De Lima is significant in the administration of justice. Though she basks in the sunshine of her restored freedom with a chip on her shoulder. She said in one interview:
“It cannot be full justice and complete vindication until, and unless, those who are responsible for political persecution and for the fabrication of these charges are held accountable, and are made to answer. They did inflict a lot of wrongs upon my person, my dignity, my honor, and my liberty. Seven years of being deprived of liberty is no small matter, especially if you’re innocent.”
Likewise, Trillanes won his legal battle when the Supreme Court upheld his amnesty validity while rebuking PRRD’s order. “Congrats, Sen. Leila de Lima! Your long-awaited personal vindication has finally come. Your next chapter begins,” Trillanes said.
The poetic yet cryptic code would later come to light through this headline: “Trillanes files plunder, graft raps vs. ex-President Duterte, Bong Go” – Inquirer. The “next chapter” seems to say, borrowing from some lyrics of a song:
“Come with me and you’ll be
In a world of full vindication
Reach out, touch what was once
Just in your imagination.”
Trillanes’ plunder rap vs. Duterte & co. is a crucial and transcending litmus test of the Philippine justice system which the DOJ upheld when it reiterated its stance on matters pertaining to the International Criminal Court (ICC):
“The DOJ is committed to upholding the principles of justice and the rule of law… ‘Gumagana ang sistema natin. Our system works. Hindi naming papabayaan ang mga biktima. Ipagtatanggol natin ang karapatan ng bawat Pilipino’.”
At this point, the Filipino people may pose this challenge to DOJ: If so, then prove it, for all the world to see, by prosecuting this plunder rap vs. Duterte & co. Thus, this plunder rap (plus more lawsuits to come) will turn out to be, from the DOJ’s point of view, an irresistible force against an immovable object – Duterte’s firewall against ICC.
It’s a crossroad for our Philippine justice system: either to welcome ICC or prosecute the plunder rap of Duterte & co. Only when our nation gets through this crossroad will we be rid of Plato’s gloomy outlook:
“The worst form of injustice is pretended justice.”
Head photo courtesy of Facebook
Video clips courtesy of YouTube
No comments:
Post a Comment