The Spectre Of Big Brother

ON Sunday, February 25, an estimated 80,000 people turned out on the streets of Manila to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the 'People Power' revolution which overthrew dictator Ferdinand Marcos. As helicopters showered confetti, President Fidel Ramos, addressing a gathering, nostalgically recalled: "The high excitement of 1986 (when the Marcos regime was overthrown by democratic forces) has receded into history. The cry of the crowds, the growl of tanks, the flutter of helicopters, all these are merely a memory for us who stood here a veritable lifetime ago." 

Ten years later, in 1996, while memories of the revolution dim, Filipinos wonder whether the legacy of autocracy might not be making a comeback. Commemoration of the revolution anniversary has been less than warm in recent years, with state functions receiving a mere handful of visitors. This year's gathering was said to be the largest in many years. Has the fervour for freedom and democracy become jaded? Media reports cite the continuing corruption and the return to politics by former Marcos aides, particularly his wife Imelda, as reasons for this public apathy.

But what seems to be at the root of disenchantment is the fear of a possible return to authoritarianism. The fact that President Ramos, a former general, speaks too often of 'emergency measures' to fight terrorism and crime is seen as an ominous sign. The anti-terrorism bill introduced in Parliament—one among a series—in January, after 27 foreign nationals were arrested on what some believe were trumped up charges of suspected terrorism, is indeed reminiscent of a past era. If the bill is passed, it would authorise wiretap-ping, surveillance of bank accounts and arrests without warrants. Senator Juan Ponce Enrile, the sponsor of this controversial piece of legislation, is the former defence secretary, who, with Ramos, led a military mutiny in February 1986 against his mentor Marcos. He also happens to be the richest man in the Philippines today and, more importantly, is not well liked.

This was evident in a demonstration protesting the bill just before a public Senate hearing was about to begin on January 29, where the crowd brandished placards bearing 'No to state terrorism' slogans. One of the demonstrators pointed out: "The senator who authorised this bill, Enrile, is the same man who was responsible for martial law in 1972."

Enrile, however, defends his bill by pointing to a threat of widespread criminality in Philippine society. "When you prosecute a criminal under the (current) judicial system,50 per cent of the proceedings is on his side," he says. "The poor prosecutor is helpless, and the criminal, even if he is guilty, goes free. If we are going to complain about the emergence of a criminal society, and blame it on the police, then in the interest of fairness let us give them the wherewithal to prosecute these malefactors."

Former president Corazon Aquino, whose 1986 election defeat of Marcos—denied by the dictator—sparked the uprising leading to his ouster, and the country's influential Roman Catholic bishops have come down heavily on the anti-terrorism legislation. Says Aquino: "It's not good to be complacent, and I'm very glad that the Filipinos are now alert, in contrast to what we were in 1972. It is good that many of us are still around in order to remind people of our generation, and to inform the young people of what many sacrificed in order for this democracy to be restored."

From the government's point of view, the anti-terrorism bill could be a move to placate the US. Philippine officials are keen to be seen cooperating with US efforts to prosecute Ramzi Yusuf, suspected to have masterminded the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Centre in New York and of plotting to kill Pope John Paul II in Manila in January 1995.
Unfortunately, the timing does not appear to be right. Ramos' popularity is at an all-time low. On January 28, he made a point of emphasising that he would not impose martial law. "It's all hype," he is reported to have told Aquino in a personal meeting that day. "Why should I declare martial law when I played a part in the restoration of democracy 10 years ago?" But with memories of Marcos on everyone's mind, few are easily persuaded by promises. And he may have over invested his political capital by bringing before the Congress not only an anti-terrorism legislation, but also a highly unpopular new value-added tax.

Some among the country's minority Muslims feel the legislation is aimed specifically at them, because of a widespread popular association of Muslims with terrorism. "If the terrorism bill is passed by the Congress and approved by the President, there is no need to have martial law," says one, "because all the paraphernalia, all the powers of martial law are there." A lawyers' group has accused the President of wanting to "re impose martial law on the instalment plan."

The situation brewing in the Philippines was best summed up by Amando Doronila, a columnist in the populist Filipino newspaper Daily Inquirer . She wrote: "The parliament of the streets that toppled Marcos is again stirring. The difference is that it is stirring against President Ramos."