Rule of men, Maguindanao-Malacañang connection

Rule of law is the single biggest guarantee of individual rights and freedom. It is the most important protection so that no unnecessary coercion of the majority over the minority, of the armed over the unarmed, of the politically powerful over the powerless, will be made. Because the rule of law simply says that the law is above anyone, no one is exempted from the law, and no one can grant exemption from the law.

Rule of men is the exact opposite of the rule of law. Men and women with power and arms rule, not the law. These are people who can make restrictive laws, or flaunt to implement those laws made earlier, but those restrictions apply only to other people, most especially to their enemies, while they and their friends are exempted from those laws.

Thus, the law against stealing and corruption, law against political harassment and terrorism, law against killing, murder and massacre, apply only to other people. Those who have political and armed power in a given country, province or locality, are exempted from such law. At least in their minds, they think they are exempted.

Such was the state of mind of the Ampatuan clan in Maguindanao province. And it is that rule of men mentality that prodded them, at least Mr. Andal Ampatuan, Jr. and his armed men, to commit the massacre of 57 people in the province early this week. Victims included the wife, family members and supporters, of the political rival from another clan. Other victims were the 18 media people who accompanied the convoy, and some innocent motorists whose car was unluckily following the convoy within minutes.

What exacerbated the absence of the rule of law in that province, was the absence of any arrest, or even the issuance of an arrest warrant, and perhaps not even a serious impartial investigation by the local police, three days after the heinous crime.

The administration and implementation of the rule of law – law against killing and massacre, in particular – lies mainly in the hands of the police. If the police is an impartial body of the State that will throw its full armed forces against armed men who have zero respect for the right to life, right to liberty and right to private property of other people, the police should have made arrests within hours, or at least within 1 day, after the heinous crime. It was not an ordinary murder of killing 1 or 3 people where only a few criminals are involved. It was a multiple murder case annihilating 57 people or more, that involved dozens, if not a hundred plus armed men, so that leads can easily be traced. The use of government property like the provincial backhoe to bury the bodies and vehicles deep should make the crime investigation easier in terms of identifying the perpetrators.

But the provincial and municipal police did not make any arrest for 3 days! During that period, it is possible for the perpetrators, the mastermind and the big number of men who were ordered to shoot and kill the victims to hide. Or even to commit more murder to terrorize more people like potential witnesses and independent media investigators. What if 50+ more people were killed while the armed thugs and murderers were covering their tracks and making sure that no potential witness will come out to speak?

The silence of the provincial and local police was directly proportional to the absence of explicit indignation at the Office of the President. If the President was horrified by the massacre, she should have lambasted the inefficiency and laziness of the local police to make immediate arrests, if only to partially immobilize those murderers who were still roaming around with their guns and killer instincts intact. There was “condemnation” in front of TV cameras and journalists’ cameras but beyond that, there was no strong arm of the state to implement the rule of law.

One can connect the close ties between the President and the Ampatuan clan. In the 2007 elections, if my memory is correct, the clan who controlled politically the entire province delivered huge political victory for the President and her Senatorial candidates. The province was among the few, if not the only one, where all 12 Senatorial candidates of the administration won. Not a single opposition Senatorial candidate, even those coming from Mindanao and from big political parties, won in the province. This is a big discrepancy from the overall national result where only about five or less administration candidates won, which implies that large-scale cheating in favor of the administration happened in the province, courtesy of the Ampatuan clan.

If this is the case, then the President has big political debts to the clan. And penalizing the latter instantly for their acts of multiple murders and massacre was something that was a non-option for the administration.

Without widespread public anger, without large-scale protests and condemnation from almost all sectors of the Philippine society especially the media, without international pressure, the no-arrest situation and perpetuation of the rule of men would have persisted.

The widespread political and media pressure coerced the President and some agencies under her like the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) to make the necessary arrest. That was four days after the massacre. Somehow, the rule of law was administered, even partially. Because only the suspected mastermind, Mr. Andal Ampatuan Jr., was arrested. There was no report yet of even one person among the men he ordered to shoot and kill, that was also arrested.

The rule of law in this case did not come voluntarily from the State, which is a shameless and dangerous situation. The promulgation of the rule of the law is the single most important function of the State. Remove that single function from the State and all its other functions, from the most bleeding-heart welfare and subsidy programs to the mundane ones are meaningless.

And this will have serious implication for the coming Presidential and local elections five months from now. Citizens and voters should insist and reiterate that their chosen candidates must promulgate and follow the rule of law: the law against stealing and corruption, the law against killing and massacre, the law against non-obedience even to ordinary traffic rules.

When there is a rule of law, there is peace, order, and growth in society.

When there is continued rule of men, there is only chaos, fear, stealing, and killing in society.

---

Disclaimer: The views and opinions advanced in this article is the author’s own, and may not necessarily represent the views and opinions of THE LOBBYiST, its editors, or its publishers.

Factual Errors? Email us at editorial@thelobbyist.biz.

Copyright 2007 The LOBBYiST. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without the expressed permission of The LOBBYiST.