The world of sports often teaches people expensive lessons about playing by the rules and respecting the referees or judges’ decision. There are countless occasions when players or coaches lose it all in the heat of the game and end up doing something stupid like a player hitting a referee, a boxer biting an ear, a soccer player behaving like Dracula, or a coach doing a “walkout” that costs P million. Those infractions can cost you money or a career. Because there are enough examples and a lot of very harsh and expensive punishments, people in sports and spectators actually know and expect it.
The beauty of the world of sports is that it also recogni es the possibility that competitors can be eTual in all ways so that games do end up in a tie and judges of certain sports have the right to declare a tie. nfortunately politics and politicians don’t work that way and the politician in the country has failed to reali e a tie and insists on a rematch, so what he could end up with is a defeat. I refer of course to President Noynoy ATuino who spent a little over minutes on prime time to defend the Disbursement Acceleration Program fiasco and then moved on to an open attack against the Supreme Court.
Last 0onday evening’s speech for me was one of the saddest days of the P-Noy presidency because it was the day when he stooped so low and so out of character from the low-key, humble man I had come to know on occasion. Last 0onday’s tirade also revealed that on this occasion P-Noy may not have done his trade mark due diligence not just on the content of the Supreme Court decision, but as to how it was packaged and presented to the public from day . )inally, 0onday’s tirade confirms previous accusations that public demolition and bullying in the P-Noy administration is their trademark tools of dealing with any opposition. It actually reminded me of the statement
V V V
I used the sports angle as my intro because to my mind, the Supreme Court may have ended the matter on a - score, but that was just on “points.” In terms of deliberations and final outcome, the Supreme Court gave the (xecutive Department so much leeway and in fact made it come out like a draw by stating that sections, not all aspects of the DAP was unconstitutional. )or many people, that statement in itself earned the label for the decision as “hilaw” or half baked early on. :hen the SC decision further mentioned “Good )aith,” the court had in fact put up an “(;IT” sign for the President and 0alacaxang to leave the building of controversy.
:hat P-Noy should have done was to move on and come up with a new game plan and that should have been the end of that. Instead P-Noy has practically copied the style of a ranting coach on the sidelines, no longer caring if he and the team get ejected or earn a technical foul.
The President’s speech makes me wonder what do you hope to get from badmouthing and threatening the Supreme Court ow does veiled threats or blind items change the merits of the case or the validity of your claims ow can your “lawyers” now go before the Justices of the Supreme Court after the tirades you’ve launched Does the President reali e that by taking up the merits of the case on a nationwide trimedia presidential rant, that he has effectively gone forum shopping and has stirred up public sentiment to put public pressure upon the Supreme Court Did anyone warn the President that his rant would render their motion for reconsideration impossible :hy bother with a motion for reconsideration if you publicly cast doubt on their wisdom Before 0onday’s speech, there was absolutely no grounds to impeach the President for DAP, but now lawyers opine that by taking up the cudgels or taking “ownership” of the DAP on T and radio, the President has publicly accepted responsibility for an act that the Supreme Court had judged as “ nconstitutional.” Did the President consider that his rant was discrediting and thereby destabili ing his government
I can sympathi e if the President feels he should get points for the beautiful pass off, the cut in the shaded area, the alley-oops and finally his slam dunk. Great score, but you were charging and drew a foul to boot Accept it, raise your hand if necessary and be a pro.
Being President of the Philippines and head of one of eTual branches of government is comparable to being one of triplets sharing the same family name. Any insult you throw at one or the other ultimately and especially backfires on you because it’s your family name “ATuino” that’s on the brand. This is your government, at least four of those Justices of the Supreme Court are your impeccable nominees, and regardless of what number the current Congress carries to differentiate it from past congresses, it is associated with you as the head of the majority and the head of the Liberal party. If you as the song goes “let the dogs out,” their rabid loyalty will be to their individual account but you will stand out as the handler that let them loose. Besides which we still, politically speaking, eat lap dogs in the Philippines.
Lastly, when the Office of the Solicitor General submitted the matter of the DAP for resolution by the Supreme Court, it was mandated by law, in obedience to the law and in recognition of the wisdom and authority of the Supreme Court. :hen Justices decided unanimously, it was a decision on the issues raised against the DAP. It was not a judgment on the leadership or integrity of Benigno Simeon ATuino III. That was never at issue. our speech made it that. It is now yours to decide if a mere decision will be the cause of your greatest defeat.