(PRWLRQDO LQWHO

DETRACTORS and supporters, the noisier ones anyway, of this administration are going at each other in an emotionally unintelligent or unrestrained partisan way. Both sides are noticeably defending their positions by prejudging the other person’s motives instead of coolly and dispassionately assessing the latter’s idea. The anonymity of social media has spawned this phenomenon of people being emboldened to be downright nasty and utter ugly things they wouldn’t dare say when they are not faceless.

Nobody seems to give anybody’s motive the benefit of the doubt anymore. People just want to defend their ideas by destroying the character of the other person. In point is the impeachment case of Chief Justice Maria Lourdes Sereno.

Instead of waiting for the truth to come out of the constitutionally prescribed process, her defenders dismiss Atty. Larry Gadon’s accusations as ill motivated simply because the President has an axe to grind with the Chief Justice and Atty.

Gadon is not their idea of a good person. Vice versa, Gadon’s supporters fire back at the Chief Justice’s defenders the same ugly personal stuff that has really no place in decent society. Why can’t people let the truth come out from the impeachment hearings? The truth is independent of the character and motives of concerned parties. If the case is ill-motivated and lacks supporting evidence it will fail. And if we can’t trust the system we just have to work to change it without maligning others.

In point also is the joint session of Congress to decide on the President’s request for a one-year extension of martial law. The very fact that the Senate and the House are in joint session to decide on this request is solid proof that martial law today is not the same as Marcos’s martial law.

Today’s martial law is going through the limiting process prescribed by the 1987 Constitution. The session, therefore, should be about Congress’ assessment of the grounds for extension. If there are constitutionally valid factual grounds, so be it and the nation has to take its chances with martial law.

But what do we hear instead? Nothing more than partisan and/or ideological posturing and moral judgment on the President’s motives. Whether or not the joint session made the right decision only time will tell.

The important thing is we have a constitutional martial law that is unlike the unilateral kind Marcos declared. Defending one’s idea by sticking to time-worn ideological imperatives and/or offensively attacking the other person’s character is not the way to move forward.

Truth (the right direction forward) can only come out of an open and emotionally intelligent bi-partisan conversation (not argument) on issues.