Is de Lima desperately seeking public sympathy?

It appears that Sen. Leila de Lima, chairman of the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights, now wants to pick up another cause after her supposed probe into alleged extrajudicial killings proved to be a dud. 

Last we heard, she filed her own petition with the Supreme Court asking that the planned burial of the late President Ferdinand Marcos at the Libingan ng mga Bayani be stopped. Many are now asking if this is the good senator’s graceful way of extricating from the trap she set for herself when she called for that unfortunate Senate investigation.

We hope she fares better in the new cause she has picked up. Based on feedback from radio listeners and newspaper readers who monitored the proceedings, Philippine National Police Director-General Ronald “Bato” dela Rosa emerged from the hearings better understood and better liked by the public.

And, while there are concerns over the many deaths that have come in the wake of the anti-illegal drugs campaign, the public appears to be happy with the rare experience of decisive leadership being displayed by both President Duterte and his PNP chief.

Again, we can only commiserate with the former justice secretary. The impression created by the sequence of moves on her part is that she may be desperately seeking public sympathy.

This has eluded her. Quite unlike the reaction of some quarters that appeared to have been offended by the President’s scathing remarks against Chief Justice Lourdes Sereno (for which the President later apologized), it looks like there is neither a public outcry in her defense nor a snowballing wave of commiseration for Senator de Lima.

Now that she has joined the bandwagon of those opposed to the Marcos burial at the Libingan, Senator de Lima appears to have reinforced the notion that she wants to be some kind of a “fiscalizer,” a word coined by the local media for someone who takes it upon himself/herself to launch a moral, and often noisy, crusade for or against a cause. If this is her intention, then she should be lauded. There appears to be no one else among those who held on to the coattails of former President Noynoy Aquino who is ready to lead a vocal opposition.

Only Senator de Lima and the Chief Justice—both women—have so far spoken out against the actions of a very popular sitting President.

Memorandum Circular 4

We join the hope that Executive Secretary Salvador Medialdea has been properly advised regarding the possible consequences of Memorandum Circular 4 (MC 4) recently issued by his office.

This now-controversial order directs all key members of the bureaucracy who were appointed by former President Noynoy Aquino to hand over their courtesy resignations.

All presidential appointees are to leave their posts, except for newly appointed Cabinet secretaries, undersecretaries and assistant secretaries and officials in the Executive department, including state universities and colleges (SUC) and government-owned or -controlled corporations (GOCC) appointed by the incumbent President.

The directive has stirred a silent row among the senior officials manning important posts, particularly those who have fixed terms provided for under specific laws. The MC may have created impressions that the administration wants to have more posts vacated so that those who helped in the campaign can be given their “just” rewards.

The question now is, what if fixed-term Noynoy appointees do not submit their courtesy resignation? Would they be charged with insubordination? What if these appointees are set to battle it out in the courts? Would the administration then resort to a naming-shaming campaign to force them out of office?

What if these appointees are actually performing well and have not been implicated in any anomaly—and their courtesy resignations were accepted?

Executive Secretary Medialdea may also have to deal with the legal implications of MC 4.

Several lawyer-friends have told us that there are laws that say “courtesy resignations, when compelled, lose their essence and value.” If this legal view is correct, then MC 4’s compulsion may be the very evidence that could make the courtesy resignations null and void.

Perhaps, the better alternative would be for the administration to specify the targets rather than to decimate the ranks of senior officials with fixed-terms using a shotgun approach.

This is one issue and one headache that the President does not need now. His attention is better focused on the more important battles – illegal drugs, the Abu Sayyaf, the Metro Manila traffic and the row with China.

Waging an all-out war against fixed-term appointees would violate a basic rule: Do not wage war on too many fronts.