September 12, 2007 will go down in history as the day when for the first time an ex-president was convicted of a crime.
It was a Wednesday and was all over the television networks. I had a meeting at 9:30 AM and the reading of the verdict was scheduled to start at 9:00 AM. I planned to catch the initial proceedings and then go on to my meeting. But even before the meeting started the decision was read. Erap was guilty of plunder on two counts beyond reasonable doubts. There were mixed emotions.
There was a sense of victory for I was there in EDSA Shrine for EDSA Dos. I followed closely the impeachment trial of the former president. I am personally convinced that he has enriched himself and his family when he was in office. And I didn’t feel comfortable the way he handled the office of the president when he was in Malacanang. There was a sense of victory for the fact that finally it was time for the “big fish.”
But there were also doubts. Our government has a very bad record in implementing laws and executing directives. Our society continues to give privileges and concessions to people of power and riches. The Philippines may be governed by law in paper but not exactly in reality. What shall become of this guilty verdict?
But a detail of the decision has really caught my attention. According to reports, mainly from newscasts on television, a banker testified to have witnessed Mr. Estrada to have signed as Jose Velarde, and Mr. Estrada himself admitted that he did sign as Jose Velarde. Whatever reason one has, whether for oneself or for a friend, why would one sign a name other than one’s own? Such an action casts doubt in the intention of an ordinary person, so much more for a seating president of a republic. Such an action casts doubt on the character of the person. If the perpetrator is an elementary student who forged the signature of his parent in order to avoid a reprimand, I know there will be more compassion and the urge to teach and correct the child. But for an adult, honest and principled, signing a name other than one’s own is just unthinkable without a sinister intention. It is dishonest.
