PBBM and nat’l security

Senator Robinhood Padilla’s recent press statement, that asking about the whereabouts of the President of the Philippines threatens national security, is legally and factually unfounded.

The President is directly voted to office by the sovereign Filipino people. That fact alone makes it virtually impossible for people not to be curious about where their President is at any given time. This is particularly true for President Ferdinand “Bongbong” Marcos Jr., who was elected by nearly 32 million votes.

In short, 32 million Filipinos will naturally want to know the whereabouts, at any given time, of the public officer they installed in Malacañang, and whose salary and expense account are shouldered by them as taxpayers.

As the nation’s leader, the President must be in the public eye as often as possible. This is to allow the people to find out what the President is doing, and that he is actually running the country as the nation’s leader should. People feel secure if they know where their leader is.

Take the current situation in Liberia, an African state. Liberian President George Weah went abroad in October 2022 for trips to different destinations, including a visit to Qatar to watch his son play at a soccer match. Since then, there have been no indications if he is back in Liberia.

Today, the Liberians are very worried that nobody seems to know where Weah is. Weah’s prolonged, mysterious absence has even aggravated the runaway inflation and the shortage of consumer goods in Liberia, prompting an opposition leader there to remark that their country is on “auto-pilot.”

Hopefully, what’s happening in Liberia will not take place in the Philippines. One way to prevent that problem is for the whereabouts of the President to be a matter of public knowledge.

Journalists and reporters answer the need for the people to know what the President is doing, and in the process, know what’s happening to the country.

Through their coverage of the events attended by the President, and of press conferences convened by the President himself, members of the news media are able to provide the people with the reassuring information that all is well with their leader and their country.

How then can asking about the whereabouts of the President of the Philippines be considered a national security threat?

Senator Padilla may have meant well in making his controversial statement, and may really had the security of the President in mind when he said that. His conclusion, however, is somehow far-fetched.

Even if the people are informed about the current whereabouts of the President, it is reasonable to assume that the Presidential Security Group, an elite force tasked with securing the safety and well-being of the President and his family, is competent enough to protect the President from harm.

Moreover, security protocols are always in place wherever the President may be at any one time, and even while the President is on the road headed for whatever function, or on his way to Malacañang.

At any rate, national security is not just about the safety of the President. As the term itself indicates, national security is the need to keep the nation functioning, and protected from any internal or external threats to its continued existence.

Instead of focusing his attention on keeping the whereabouts of the President a secret, Senator Padilla should be more concerned about, say, the constitutionality of Republic Act No. 11659 which reclassifies airports from public utilities (covered by the 60:40 pro-Filipino ownership and management ratio mandated by the Constitution) to a mere public service (open to full and exclusive ownership and control by aliens).

Under that law, aliens can now put up, own and control a mega-airport anywhere in Philippine territory, and operate it for the exclusive use of aliens. Thus put, China can operate an airport in the country. That will be a threat to the national security of the Philippines.

“National security is the need to keep the nation functioning, and protected from any internal or external threats to its continued existence.

“National security is not just about the safety of the President.