"x x x.
To find fault with critics by saying their statements make the issue grave and place “in danger hundreds of thousands of Filipinos” is simply irresponsible talk. It diverts the identification of the real source of the problem. It misdirects and does not address the root cause of the bloody events in Sabah. On the other hand, critics do not make regulations, rules and the laws. They do not implement policies. Their power lies only in their perceptive observations of events, their skill in making an idea clear, and the media platform to relay them. It would be irresponsible and unpatriotic for these critics not to share them, regardless of what others think. Their sense of duty to the nation impels them to openly, and even publicly, criticize. Margaret Chase Smith said “moral cowardice that keeps us from speaking our minds is as dangerous to this country as irresponsible talk."
More fundamentally, Section 1 Article 2 of the Declaration of Principles and State Policies of our Constitution provides that “the Philippines is a democratic and republican state. Sovereignty resides in the people and all government authority emanates from it.” The people have entrusted enormous powers to the public officials in government. There will always be a great temptation to misuse, not use and, worse, abuse these powers. When this happens, public servants become despots. And the people become subjects of a ruler. The constitutional principle that “sovereignty resides in the people” becomes an empty statement and the Constitution desecrated. This is where the role of our freedom of expression comes in. It is the duty of all citizens to speak up and to remind the “powers-that-be” where sovereignty resides. The people must do so without fear of reprisals. They must all be critics to prevent the non-use, misuse and abuse of power.
A function of free speech under our system of government is to invite dispute. It may indeed best serve its high purpose when it induces a condition of unrest, creates dissatisfaction with conditions as they are, or even stirs people to anger. Speech is often provocative and challenging. It may strike at prejudices and preconceptions and have profound unsettling effects as it presses for acceptance of an idea. That is why freedom of speech, though not absolute... is nevertheless protected against censorship or punishment, unless shown likely to produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience,
annoyance, or unrest. (US Associate Justice William Douglas in Terminiello vs. City of Chicago, 377 US 4-5)
Government action or inaction will necessarily generate public opinion. It may be good and it may be candidly annoying. But speaking out ideas and opinions must not be discouraged. It is in fact the responsibility of our elected officials to listen to the people’s criticisms. They were entrusted with a great privilege to serve the people, they must listen. They may or may not heed the diversity of the people’s views and they may choose one from the other, but they must always be given a measure of scrutiny. Public opinion may be unpredictable, presumptuous and erratic but its intrinsic value in a democratic society outweighs its fickleness.
The first Prime Minister and acclaimed founder of the State of Israel, Mr. David Ben Gurion, said it perfectly: “The test of democracy is freedom of criticism.” Gurion accepted criticism even at a time when Israel was in its precarious formative stage. He studied them, learned from them and made decisions after taking them into consideration. President Aquino should learn from Gurion. It is wrong to regard critics as necessarily enemies of the State or conspirator
nment was labeled a subversive. In this administration, are we already seeing the nascent stage of a period where anyone speaking against the government will be labeled as a conspirator? I hope not.
In one episode of our radio/TV show RELASYON, Luchi Cruz Valdes, head of TV5 news and current affairs, and I talked about “criticisms.” I asked her what, for her, was the value of criticism. She succinctly replied: “Criticisms make one humble.” Indeed, their expression may painfully sting and hurt one’s sensibilities. But, at the same time, criticisms can shake people from their know-all-attitude, making them realize their own fallibility as any other finite human being. And when this humility sets in, they listen. And when they listen, they open up their minds to the universe, thoughts and ideas of their critics, whose most likely reason for speaking up is precisely for the good of the people criticized.
My unsolicited advice to the President is this: Mr. President, we sincerely want you to succeed. Our prayers are with you and our people. We are with you in finding a solution to this Sabah problem. Step back for a while, take a deep breath and listen to your critics, for, in the end, they may turn out to be your best allies, in finding a solution to the Sabah problem. Let the essence of democracy guide you in solving the problem.
x x x."
