100ARAW.com

By Gerson Garcia

Makabayan's Ocampo and Maza, and NP's Villar and Legarda, raise hands at the formal announcement of their coalition. Photo courtesy of Bulatlat.

As they say, nothing is permanent in politics; everything is survival especially if election season is just around the corner.  This applies to all politicians though at some different magnitude made visible by their making of some political concessions; one gives and he also has to receive, or to put it, sometimes forced to stomach things that are against one’s long-standing principles.

Satur Ocampo is joining the elections to get a piece of the Senate seat; a man known by many as a true opposition figure, nationalist and strong advocate of human rights especially of the poor sectors of the Philippine society.  He is hoping to do more for his countrymen, a battle cry of all politicians since time immemorial.

But now, my long admiration and respect to this man who had given a well-fought battle for justice and equality had slowly diminished if not totally on a questionable position as soon as he joined and coalesced with Manny Villar’s Nationalista Party (NP).

One cannot simply reckon with the ironies of things that Satur is into for his senatorial campaign.  I cannot help then but raise some questions about his untarnished integrity, unwavering principles and being the voice of the masses.

I raise these questions therefore:

1.  Satur Ocampo is running a TV ad saying that he will strongly advocate against the sorry state of agrarian reform in the country while at the same time robustly assailing LP’s standard-bearer Noynoy Aquino for being a “haciendero” with the black and white background of the bloody Hacienda Luisita dispersal playing.  Taking the ad at face value, one could easily be lured into a picture of an epic battle of the true hero of the masses who will march forth to their aid.  Unfortunately, this is where the smoke of reality rises up and makes the people rub their eyes to know if they were just lulled into a daydream.

While Satur Ocampo strongly assails Aquino for being a haciendero and failing to effect the agrarian reform on his family-owned estate Hacienda Luisita, he has on the one hand allied himself with Villar’s NP that has been hounded by corrupt business practices and use of his public office in order to favor his billion-worth of business interests.  Aside from the C-5 controversy, mostly, these Villar lands where sun-drenched “elitist” homes stand with tall gates surrounding them and shrouded with exclusivity were reported by news agencies to have been acquired from poor farmers or in a questionable manner.  Some former land owners are still even slugging it out with Villar in court.

Now, what is the big difference with Aquino and Villar regarding land reform?  Is Villar the lesser evil compared to Noynoy, if there is such a thing as lesser evil just because Villar came from poverty and was not born as a “haciendero”?  Villar now owns unimaginable vast tracts of land where years ago covered by golden farmlands that provide livelihood to farmers.  He has built his business empire by dividing the elite from the poor more so by widening this gap through questionable business practices and muscling his real estate projects with government agencies.

Has Satur Ocampo become selective on his fight and advocacy in terms of land reform issues and with politicians who has used their power to further their personal interests?  Or is Villar just totally immaculate in the eyes of a Satur Ocampo?

2. While Satur has become one of the most recognizable faces of the opposition during the dictatorship, tortured and the longest to be detained during the imposition of the Martial Law, he has stomached to ally himself with NP that also hosts Bongbong Marcos on its senatorial line-up.  Until today, the Marcoses never admitted that atrocities and human right violations were committed during the reign of the late dictator; they are never sorry for everything that had happened.

Ocampo said that there is a “comparison of ousted dictator Ferdinand Marcos and incumbent Pres. Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo lacked the one blatant similarity: Arroyo, like Marcos, is responsible for massive human rights violations against the Filipino people.”

Then, why has Satur still joined NP? Well, he said that the NP agreed to push their agenda “of due compensation to human rights violation victims under the Marcos dictatorship and full recovery of Marcos’ ill-gotten wealth,” while Villar’s NP is also allied Bongbong Marcos’ KBL!  Any average man knows that this agreement will never come to life especially with Villar making so many concessions to everyone just for him to win.  That talk was all crap.

This irony is like saying Mar Roxas is going to run as LAKAS-KAMPI-CMD’s official or adopted vice-presidential candidate so long as the LAKAS party will push for his agenda of running after and jailing Gloria Arroyo after her term.

3.  Ocampo describes himself as the champion of the masses “[a]lways in the forefront of the Filipinos’ struggle against exploitation, oppression, and marginalization, [and] believes that true democracy is founded on the interests of the masses and not of the ruling elite.”  This made me scratch my head, aren’t the Villars, Remullas, Mitras, Cayetanos, Marcos, Revillas to name a few, members of the ruling elite who one way or another been involved to the abovementioned quote?

This is where we can see that even a Satur Ocampo, just like all politicians, will have to join the noisy and dirty market of political barter trade.  Some people are even wondering the magnitude of Satur Ocampo’s political spending compared to other senatorial candidates in terms of TV ads and the number and quality of campaign posters plastered all over town.

Ocampo cannot escape the public scrutiny of his present political affiliations.  It should never be, “Ok I will ally with your party, though I am strongly against the other party candidates because of my advocacies so long as we will not bump on each other.”

At the end of the day, voters can vividly see that political compromise and concessions were made; even by the most-principled oppositionist and human rights advocate all for political survival.