The Unlawyer

I suppose President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo’s decision this afternoon to extend to her convicted predecessor Joseph “Erap” Estrada an offer of executive clemency was not wholly unexpected, given the latter’s surprise withdrawal of his appeal and subsequent application for pardon after taking such a hard stance against it since he was sentenced to life in prison. Nevertheless, no one foresaw that she would act on it so soon, but here we are: Erap could be a free man as early as tomorrow afternoon.

As it turned out, Mrs. Arroyo made her offer “almost immediately” after Mr. Estrada was convicted last September 12.

Understandably, Erap’s prosecutors are not pleased:

“[Special Prosecutor Dennis] Villa-Ignacio said the grant of pardon to Estrada will erase all the efforts of the prosecution panel to punish corruption in the country.

x x x

“He said that the 70-year-old age of Estrada is not sufficient in the possible grant of pardon since the important aspect of a request for pardon is the admission of guilt. He said everyone knows that Estrada has not made that admission. He added that there should be “substandtial incarceration” after the conviction.”

And what of Mr. Estrada’s one-time-best-friend-turned-bitter-enemy Luis “Chavit” Singson? He had an inkling of what was to come and he did not like it as well:

“Singson told dzBB radio on Wednesday that extending pardon to Estrada would serve as an injustice to witnesses who mustered the courage to testify against one of the most powerful men in the country.

“”If you set him free, why did we file charges against him in the first place? What were we up in arms about? Then it seems that the pardon was already in the pipeline. This will set a bad example for our children,” said Singson in Filipino.

“Singson, the alleged “smoking gun” in the Estrada trial, expressed bitterness that a deal for Estrada’s pardon was already being forged, adding that witnesses became unwitting “actors” in a “stage play.”"

Some bloggers shared Mr. Villa-Ignacio’s and Mr. Singson’s sentiments as well, like Prudence and Madness, who went as far as saying that it made a mockery of the Philippine judicial system. The Four-eyed Journal is similarly outraged, especially at the “Whereas” clauses of the President’s order that sought to justify Mr. Estrada’s release. The Warrior Lawyer described it as an exercise in cynicism:

“Her move was motivated by the exigencies of political survival, of course. Under fire from all sides for her almost surreal and diabolic corrupt practices (overpriced and questionable deals, handing out cash in bags to underlings like a Mafia don and other things I can hardly bear to think about), she had to remove a political thorn on her side and neutralize a potent opposition rallying point. In doing so, she kicked us all in the teeth, with a smirk on her face.”

Thinking along similar lines, Postcard Headlines says Erap’s pardon will set a precedent in favor of the incumbent:

“With all the scandals now being placed on her table, it would be no surprise if she ends up like Estrada today – guilty of plunder and other such high crimes.

“Pardoning Estrada would give whoever would be elected in 2010 a precedent; that any future guilty verdict can be settled by executive clemency.”

Lost in Transition compared Mr. Estrada’s pardon to that of disgraced former US president Richard Nixon, but the comparison is not precise. While both men were dogged with scandal while in office, Mr. Nixon was never impeached by the US House of Representatives nor convicted in a court of law; rather, he chose to resign from office in 1974 when he felt that his impeachment – and his forcible removal from office – was inevitable. His successor Gerald Ford decided to pardon him, and the reason behind it makes for interesting reading:

“Citing reasons of national reconciliation, the difficulty Nixon would have in obtaining a fair trial by jury, and the suffering that Nixon and his family had already endured, Ford announced that he had pardoned Richard Nixon for all crimes he committed or “may have committed” while president.”

Mr. Ford was also severely criticized for pardoning his predecessor, and was punished himself, in a manner of speaking, when he lost his presidential re-election bid to Jimmy Carter. Mr. Ford was accused of cutting a quid pro quo deal with Mr. Nixon, but as Bob Woodward explained, there wasn’t any.

—

I will be taking a brief vacation from blogging and will be back next week.