Again, Snap Elections

Conrado de Quiros, Inquirer

Antonio Trillanes -- Senator to you and me -- has a petition. That petition calls for a snap election to resolve today’s political and moral impasse and allow the country to truly move on. I saw it last Monday and I had no problem affixing my signature to it.

The reason for that is simply that I myself have been calling for snap elections for years now. I called for it shortly after the “Hello Garci” tape surfaced, saying that if our problem was that we did not have a real president, then the solution was to have one, which could only happen with snap elections. I called for it when the congressmen, led by Jose de Venecia before adversity caused him to experience a change of heart, such as he is rumored to have one, were busy killing the impeachment bids. I asked why our congressmen should hold the national interest hostage to their greed and we felt powerless to do anything about it.

I called for it when De Venecia was trying to ram Charter change down our throats while citing the many virtues of parliamentary rule like the devil quoting Scripture to suit his purposes. I said merely opposing Charter change was being purely defensive, the point was not to change the Charter but the Usurper -- the Charter was genuine, the Usurper was fake.

I called for it when everyone was debating the virtues and vices of a military coup, however it was called, withdrawal or strike. I said there was already a coup regime in place, one wrought by ballot rather than by bullet, the point was still snap election to render the illegitimate legitimate.
The objections to my proposal were: one, it would present no end of legal tangles; and, two, the question of “succession” should be debated only after Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was gone. The point was how she might be made to go.

The first by no means presents an insurmountable problem. It’s not only that in this country where there’s a will there’s a way -- and correspondingly, as shown by Congress and impeachment, where there’s no will there’s no way -- it’s also that in this country where there’s a way there’s a will. Nothing shows that better than Arroyo. The fact that Joseph Estrada was an elected president, and the most popularly elected president at that, did not pose a problem to the Supreme Court when he was ousted by People Power. And rightly so: The law is nothing more or less than the expression of the people’s will. Where that will is manifested directly and clearly, it overrules the statutes written in parchment. Where a universal, or a near-universal, demand for a snap election is made by the people, it becomes law. Or more to the point, it commands a law to come forth in support of it. Chief Justice Hilario Davide had no problem finding one to proclaim Arroyo as Estrada’s successor.

The second objection merely shows lack of imagination. A snap election is not something you should think about only after you have formulated a strategy to oust a usurper, it should be the very core of your strategy to oust a usurper. True enough, a snap election can happen only after a usurper is ousted, but the call for a snap election can, and should, happen to oust a usurper. If it is a popular call, and there is no reason why it shouldn’t be if made the object of a campaign, complete with the call for civil disobedience if left unheeded, then it becomes the very instrument to pry loose the fingers of someone clinging unlawfully, unreasonably, indeed madly, to the throne. Snap elections are not an afterthought, they are an aforethought.

It is superior in every respect to any other strategy to free this country. At the very least, it goes to the heart of the problem, which is legitimacy. All other things are derivative. Even the killings: You are illegitimate, you will use coercion to keep power, including slaughtering the innocents. Even the corruption: You think nothing of stealing the vote, you will think nothing of stealing the tax. You cheat in elections -- and you can’t have a more monumental case of it than “Hello Garci” -- you void your claim to any position, whatever the tally shows. Hell, you void your claim to freedom. You have not earned a berth in Malacañang, you have earned a cot in Muntinlupa.

At the very most, it should put to rest a seemingly formidable question but which is really the easiest thing to answer. That question is: What is your alternative to Arroyo? Or, who do you want to be there instead of Arroyo? My answer is simple: My alternative to Arroyo is the one the voters vote for. The one I want there instead of Arroyo is the one the voters vote for.
The question, “Who do you want in place of Arroyo?” is not a thorny one, it is an idiotic one. Or have we forgotten that we are supposed to be a democracy? If the problem is that Arroyo is a fake president, then the solution is to have a genuine president. It’s the other strategies that are secondary or derivative. Whether the path to make Arroyo go away is people power, civil disobedience, a military strike, to annoy her with text jokes, or all of the above, each one will still have to reckon with elections. Or else the successor will be an illegitimate one as well.

While at this, it also solves the problem of who that successor will be, or should be. It can neither be Noli de Castro nor Reynato Puno, other than in a (very) brief capacity as overseer of snap elections. Arroyo succeeded Estrada constitutionally because the presidency was vacated by an act of People Power, De Castro cannot succeed Arroyo constitutionally because the presidency has not been occupied since May 2004 by an act of Hello Kitty. However long and winding the procession is, as a local saying goes, it still ends up in church. However varied and tortuous the strategizing goes, it still ends up in one thing:

Snap elections.