Monitoring

The Armed Forces of the Philippines has denied it is monitoring the movements and activities of Vice President Leni Robredo, detained senator Leila de Lima, and rabble-rousing senator Antonio Trillanes. Maybe the AFP is indeed not monitoring these three. Or maybe it, in fact, does. So what's the fuss? Is it wrong to be monitoring the activities of people?

There is a whale of a difference between monitoring and doing something about it. For as long as the AFP is not doing anything to hinder the movements of the three, except of course de Lima who is already in detention, or to curtail their activities, I do not think monitoring is something that is totally out of synch with what the armed forces of a country is supposed to do.

The armed forces of a country has a very wideranging set of responsibilities it must perform to protect the integrity of that country. A large part of those responsibilities is to gather intelligence in order to be a step or even steps ahead of just about any eventuality. I don't have to enumerate what these eventualities may be. Any self-respecting citizen knows what these are and knows exactly where his expectations lie on the matter of addressing them.

I resent the fact that the news about the AFP monitoring Robredo, de Lima, and Trillanes is being made to appear as if the armed forces of this country is doing something sinister when in fact it is simply doing its job — that is if it is indeed doing the alluded to monitoring. If it is not, then it ought to and should be prodded to. Because it would be remiss in its job if it didn't.

The problem with the sinister shade cast upon the monitoring is that it is being cast in the same light as the suspicions that something might be afoot against the government of President Duterte. I must say so, though, that such suspicions are not and cannot be unfounded, for as long as there is mixed into the triumvirate a character like Trillanes, who has a history of rising up against constitutional authority.

Maybe the AFP was forced to deny it was doing the monitoring of the three because it did not want to be dragged into the controversy. Maybe, too, it did not want public scrutiny to get in the way of its responsibilities. And it is good that it denied the story. The AFP can certainly work so much better without a monkey on its back.

The armed forces of a country doing some monitoring of its top officials is not uncommon, although it is true almost every military in the world will deny doing so. Intelligence gathering will be rendered ineffective if there are doors that cannot be opened. The ability to get behind every door is essential in providing that mantle of security that every country worth its salt needs.

The armed forces of a country is in the best position to do monitoring and intelligence gathering. It probably has the best resources to do so. And it is expected to have the widest variety of units to do the widest variety of jobs. So let us not be too allergic about intelligence gathering because that happens all the time, not just within a country but across borders from one country to as many others. Who knows who else than the AFP is looking at Robredo, de Lima, and Trillanes.

‘Let us not be too allergic about intelligence gathering because that happens all the time’