Bam Aquino and the danger of a paradoxical politics
In college, my Constitution and Politics 101 professor asked our class of 25 engineering students to write a piece on the significance of government and why.
I entered a trance state, wore my minor Conrado de Quiros hat, and wrote an essay on five sheets of yellow-lined paper in less than an hour. I argued that a government exists, ideally, to provide direction and protection to its citizenry. I tackled various aspects: financial, political, and psychological, among others. Its mandate is to ensure stability, peace, and growth for its people. Its absence presents pure chaos, where violence lurks and the strongest faction militarily rules. But we don’t live in an ideal Philippines with a faultless government. So does Sen. Bam Aquino.
In an interview recently, he said, ideally, those involved in extrajudicial killings (EJK) in the Philippines should be tried in the country where the alleged crimes happened. He qualified it by adding that he respected the process of the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague. His “ideally” statement was problematic, given the context of the political arena.
It was delivered at a time when former President Rodrigo Duterte is facing charges at the ICC, while his daughter, Vice President Sara Duterte, has just announced her plan to run for the highest post in the land in 2028. Aquino’s allies saw it as a bitter pill to swallow; his supporters became divided.
Aquino is now seen as one of the leaders of the legitimate opposition or the progressive groups after securing the second highest number of votes in the 2025 senatorial election. His pronouncement was unacceptable because it signaled his incompetence in understanding what’s going on on the ground and his dismal appreciation of the pleas of the relatives and loved ones of drug war victims during the Duterte regime.
In March 2025, former Justice Secretary and current Ombudsman Jesus Crispin Remulla admitted that there are substantial gaps and systematic failures in gathering evidence because of various reasons: absence of police reports, destroyed evidence, and police obstruction. Is Aquino so detached that he’s unaware of these?
Can justice be served in our country with these facts in mind? How about the mammoth-like pressure that the judges and justices have to surmount if the trials were to be conducted here? Aquino must be reminded that the families of the victims exhausted every possible avenue to obtain justice, but it was nowhere to be found. The Philippines has failed them; hence, the ICC trials are a must. It is a court of last resort meant to prosecute individuals for genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and aggression.
There is a time and place for paradoxical politics defined by grand posturing for outstanding survey ratings. It must never occur at the expense of the voiceless, oppressed, and tired families of EJK victims. It must not flourish by dispiriting sincere supporters who, time and time again, believe that there’s a future for the Philippines because an Aquino is still in the Senate.
Ideally, there is no corruption, hunger, or injustice in the Philippines. But it’s not the reality we live in. Our leaders like Aquino should know better. Nobody needs five sheets of yellow-lined paper to unmask the truth of our country’s current state—one imperishable sheet is sufficient.
Benre J. Zenarosa,
zenarosabenre@gmail.com
For letters to the editor and contributed articles, email to opinion@inquirer.net
