Monday, October 08, 2007 Millan: A cruel judge By Atty. Taipan Millan One small voice
THE LONG and winding road to the conclusion of the trial of our former President has finally come to a dead end. What is left to do is either we go back down the lane or we proceed with the journey and find new paths. Obviously, standing still is not part of the choices, or at least it should not be.
Going back down the lane would mean the grant and acceptance of an absolute pardon, as if the six-year trial was undertaken just for kicks, and the brickbats of the prosecution and the flaks of the defense were all just for show.
Proceeding with the journey and finding new paths would mean the imposition of the full force of the law in accordance with the court decision despite the former status and position of the convict, without offering any excuses or explanations as the verdict is clear and the judgment is legal, and a realization that for the first time a real big fish is caught and it remains in the net.
Standing still would mean passing the buck on the next administration, dribbling the ball for as long possible without shooting it, and just enumerate a litany of justifications in order that the court ruling will never become final, or at least not soon, and so the rest house arrest continues.
Indeed, these are tough choices to make for an already divided and fractious country.
But this early, there are disturbing signs on the logic or reason of some of our leaders. A lot of them boldly declare that, for the sake of the unity of our country, an absolute pardon should be given out. A lot of them daringly pronounce that, in order for reconciliation to happen, an absolute pardon must be handed out.
What? This is no longer about the legal aspects of the case, whether justice has truly been served, or politics really made the decision. This is no longer about the legal strategy to file a motion for reconsideration and then file an appeal if the former fails. This is no longer about the political strategy to tarnish the reputation of the Justices and question the credibility of the court ruling.
This is already about the philosophy or way of thinking, or the attitude or set of values, of some of our leaders. It is incomprehensible to equate absolute pardon with instant national unity. It is unfathomable to equate absolute pardon with automatic national reconciliation.
Maybe it can be a start. Perhaps it can be a beginning. But the way the statements were made showed neither signs of sorrow nor hints of humiliation. They might even be considered as slightly arrogant or partly overbearing, as if pardon is a matter of right, and as if pardon is the one and only precondition for the realization of unity and reconciliation.
We want national unity. We want national reconciliation. But we also want truth and justice, no matter how much these ideals have already wavered in their genuine meaning at this day and age. And we also want logic and reason, especially for our leaders.
To insist that absolute pardon will instantly and automatically result in national unity and national reconciliation, or that without it there will be no unity and reconciliation, is really a very bad sign of the way some of our leaders think and feel.
It is totally ignoring logic or reason, which is definitely not of the innocent kind, or completely distorting values, which is almost malicious. To be asked to forgive and to forget is something. To be deliberately fooled or to be shamelessly blackmailed is something else.
Whatever the leaders of our country will finally decide on doing, may it teach yet another lesson for us all. Always, we deserve the consequences of our free acts. Forever, foresight does not often come early enough, and hindsight is often a cruel judge.
Comments are most welcome. Please send them to attytaipanmillan@gmail.com.
