Published in the Manila Times
November 8, 2003

In one of the forums on the Davide impeachment case I attended recently as a guest speaker, I was appalled when one of the reactors blamed the whole thing on Eduardo “Danding” Cojuangco Jr. He effectively said that Cojuangco maneuvered the whole thing to avenge an adverse ruling from the Supreme Court on the coco levy case. Ergo, the Davide impeachment is a Cojuangco plot, Davide should not be impeached.

Sadly, this reactor is merely mouthing a conspiracy theory propagated by some sections of the media and the elite. Even supposedly knowledgeable political commentators cannot infer anything from the controversy except the Danding conspiracy theory.

What I found so appalling in these conspiracy theories was not only a refusal to discuss the facts, but what I thought to be a sinister campaign to stir political hatred.

However, even granting that these conspiracy theories deserve to be discussed, is there a basis for them? Is SMC Chairman Danding Cojuangco really behind it all?

If Danding did indeed give the marching orders to his NPC partymates, how come not all NPC congressmen signed the impeachment resolution? Would Congressmen Agapito Aquino and Carlos Padilla, both of whom suffered under Marcos’s martial law and who are among the pro-impeachment congressmen, allow themselves to be stooges of Cojuangco? Has Congressman Mike Zubiri, a “Spice Boy,” sold himself to Cojuangco because he signed the resolution?

The fact is that many congressmen crossed party lines to sign the resolution. Lakas Congressman Joey Salceda, a well-known investment analyst before he entered politics, signed the resolution and went before television cameras to say he found merit in the resolution. He only withdrew his signature after intense pressure from Malacanang.

What about the pro-impeachment Alliance of Court Employees Associations of the Philippines – are all their members under the payroll of San Miguel?

That Cojuangco did this to avenge an adverse ruling from the Davide court doesn’t make sense. Cojuangco still has more cases pending before the High Court or to be appealed to it, so what does he gain by antagonizing the whole Court at this stage?
I could think of more people than Cojuangco who deserve to become a hate object. At least since Marcos fell, Cojuangco hasn’t occupied a public position or abused a public office. Instead, he has multiplied the value of the stock of San Miguel several fold, benefiting both government and coconut farmers. On the contrary, government appointed officials have run the United Coconut Planters Bank to the ground, costing the public billions.

This conspiracy peddling is really an attempt to deflect a public airing of the facts. The situation did not grow out of a conspiracy but from the complaints of a democratic constituency. Congressman Felix William “Wimpy” Fuentebella Jr. acted, not due to any marching order from Cojuangco, but from complaining court employees, who said that they weren’t receiving the allowances that they were entitled to receive from the Judiciary Development Fund .When Fuentebella sought answers from the Supreme Court, all he got was stonewalling from Chief Justice Davide.

Unable to get answers to give to the court employees due to the defiance of the High Court, what did Fuentebella do? Encouraged a military cabal to stage a coup and unseat the whole High Court? No, he went through the democratic process of convincing his fellow congressmen to file an impeachment complaint.

Instead of thanking him for adhering to the Constitutional process, the hatemongers from the pulpit, academe, media, and civil society are demonizing Fuentebella and his fellow congressmen with conspiracy theories and threatening them with “people power.” With them making all those threats of “people power,” who are the real democrats now?

These hatemongers are practicing a politics of hatred that could lead the country down the road of civil war. Instead of a public airing of the facts, which would happen in an impeachment trial, they would rather muzzle the congressmen and the complaining court employees and peddle conspiracy theories. It’s not democracy or judicial independence they are out to defend, but their privileged positions where they consider themselves above the law.

If former President Estrada fomented class hatred, these groups are also practicing the politics of hatred. But be warned: the politics of hatred is a like a fire and the perpetuator can also be burned by it.

This politics of hatred is hateful. It has no place in a civilized, democratic society. Unfortunately, the public discourse is being seized by the hatemongers. But as the late Inday Badiday would say, “Careful, careful.”

When news broke out that the German firm Fraport complained to the World Bank that it was being allegedly shaken down by no less than the personal lawyer of President Arroyo, it wasn’t at all surprising to jaded observers of the Philippine political scene. The fact is that it fits into a pattern of extortion to Philippine political culture.

Mind you, this extortion culture extends from the low to the high levels of government. The term “kotong cops” accurately reflects the public perception of our beloved members of the police force. Instead of “to serve and protect,” which is the slogan of the police force, it’s more like “to extort and collect.” Even our firemen are known to ask for a “fee” before they will direct their hoses in a particular direction.

Extortion culture is accepted by the public as being the norm in Philippine politics. Indeed, we can be pretty inventive in describing the extortion prevalent in our political culture. For example, the term “AC/DC” does not mean alternating current or direct current to most Filipinos, but “attack, collect; defend, collect,” which is a sophisticated way of saying some politicians know how to make a living by attacking and defending.

So prevalent is the extortion culture in our politics that it’s not only those rightist, high government officials who exhibit it, but the Philippine leftist rebels too. Under the guise of collecting “revolutionary taxes,” leftist rebels are also into extortion activities. Don’t pay “revolutionary taxes” and either they burn your equipment or threaten your life.

Pity then the poor businessman trying to make an honest living in the country. He is hemmed in on all sides from extortionary demands, from the lowly cop in his beat to the BIR examiner, from the likes of “Ka Roger” to educated lawyers.

Our extortion political culture is really a reflection of two things: one is the prevalence of “rent-seeking” in our society; and the other is the weakness of the state.
Rent-seeking is the non-market extraction of surplus. True capitalists make their profit from the market. They create value whether in manufacturing, trading and distribution and then extract profit from the value they created in the marketplace.

Rent-seeking capitalists, on the other hand, like the AC/DC politicians, kotong cops, and leftist rebels, don’t create value at all, but extract a profit nonetheless from the existing wealth in society.
The weakness of the state, however, exacerbates the problem. The state has been so captured by the rent-seekers that there’s nobody in government that a business could turn to for help. Extortion exists in all societies, but when government itself becomes the problem – as it was the problem for Fraport – then extortion in the political culture becomes severely dysfunctional. Take note that Fraport didn’t even bother to seek redress in Philippine courts (who would, when the lawyer could purportedly predict the High Court’s future resolutions?). but instead ran to the World Bank.

This phenomenon of a weak state being used and trampled on by powerful rent-seekers to accumulate profits for private ends the political scientist Paul Hutchcroft calls “booty capitalism.” I have a simpler term for it: Mafia-style capitalism.

There’s not much difference really between a Sicilian gang’s asking protection money from small businessmen and a Hugo Boss-suited official or his lawyer asking for his share of the loot in a BOT contract. Only a Mafiosi would be so crude as to threaten businessmen with just guns, but Mafia-like Philippine rent-seekers can threaten businessmen with all sorts of decrees and rulings.

The Mafia-like character of Philippine capitalism can help explain the ferociousness by which the different factions are contending for control of the state. As Mafia groups defend their territories, sometimes going to “war” to do so, so do the different factions of the Philippine rent-seeking elite.

It has been said that the “war” between the factions in the Philippines has been bloodless, unlike in other countries where assassination, terrorism, and violence are common in their political history. Even the Oakwood rebellion was bloodless.

But let us remember that Ninoy Aquino was assassinated, although that occurred in the dying days of the Marcos regime. Also, conflict between factions has been bloody and violent at the local level.
Moreover, conflict between Mafia-like gangs tends to erupt in violence. Violence goes hand in hand with an extortion culture. The same logic could prevail over the existing conflict between factions of our rent-seeking elite, particularly when the last bastion of peaceful resolution, the Supreme Court, is perceived to be politicized and captured by one faction.

Those who seek salvation from our extortion culture cannot take comfort in Hutchcroft’s observation that a booty capitalist state is the most difficult to reform.

This extortion culture is the bane of Philippine society and helps explain the violence, disorder, and instability in our political life.