MANILA, Philippines--The campaign operative of a candidate who shall remain unidentified all but trashed this newspaper’s invitation to participate in a presidential debate.

“Can you guarantee us,” he snarled at the Inquirer employee who delivered the invitation about a month ago, “that you won’t spin the debate as pro-Noynoy?”

The answer is “Yes, of course”—and the operative’s candidate evidently agreed. He is one of the eight presidential candidates who have reconfirmed their attendance in “Inquirer 1st Edition: The Presidential Debate.”

(The newspaper is expecting former President Joseph Estrada, the first candidate to accept the invitation, to reconfirm his attendance before the debate gets under way at 10 a.m. Monday at the UP Theater in Diliman, Quezon City.)

In reverse alphabetical order, the candidates are Sen. Manuel Villar, Bro. Eddie Villanueva, ex-Defense Secretary Gilbert “Gibo” Teodoro, Nicanor Perlas, Sen. Anna Consuelo “Jamby” Madrigal, Sen. Richard Gordon, Councilor John Carlos “JC” de los Reyes and Sen. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino III. Estrada would be the ninth.

They will face a total of nine panelists: Inquirer columnists Dean Raul Pangalangan, Fr. Joaquin Bernas SJ and Inquirer senior reporter Fe Zamora; columnists Rina Jimenez-David and Prof. Michael Tan and Inquirer youth section editor Pam Pastor; columnist Dr. Cielito Habito, Inquirer opinion editor Jorge Aruta and Inquirer business editor Raul Marcelo.

The forum, the first presidential debate to be organized by this newspaper, is open to all media—live bloggers and Tweeters included.

Lucky 9

The presidential forum follows a three-on-three format—three panels of three interviewers each, with three rounds of questioning per panel.

All told, the nine presidential candidates will face nine questions or sets of questions each, from the nine panelists, supplemented by nine predetermined interlocutors from the audience (who will ask one question each).

Unlike many other presidential debates, there will be no general question addressed to all candidates. Instead, each candidate will answer a total of nine specifically tailored questions or sets of questions.

Lessons learned

At least as planned, the design is meant to encourage a real exchange of ideas between interviewer and candidate, instead of the one-question, one-long-scripted-answer trap.

The format owes something to previous debates organized by other hosts. In particular, the emphasis on short, snappy questions is a lesson learned from the recent debate in De La Salle University, which succeeded in large part because of the quick, no-preamble questions.

Also, the format moves forward the “Isang Tanong” series of debates conducted by the Inquirer’s 2010 election partner GMA network, by creating space for follow-up questions.

Fairness safeguards

Five of the panelists are columnists in the newspaper’s opinion section, known for the second half of the Inquirer slogan “balanced news, fearless views.”

Thus, the key question that the organizing committee faced was: Can columnists known for taking fearless views serve as fair-minded members of a debate panel?

The committee designed a format that it thought would “neutralize” any columnist’s perceived bias. But it also instituted what it called fairness safeguards.

The role of moderator was severely curtailed; it now consists essentially of ensuring the “flow” of questions during the debate (because of the time restrictions) and ensuring that all candidates stick to the time limits.

Because of the strict time limits, the moderator has no time to “editorialize” on the candidates’ answers.

The task of moderating was also shared among three panelists.

Stricter parameters for discussion were laid down: For instance, when a candidate is answering a question, all other candidates’ microphones would be turned off.

All candidates received the same number of tickets to the debate—20 for supporters, plus two VIP seats. All candidates can bring in at most three affiliated bloggers (on top of the 20 supporters).

No candidate can hang streamers or other collateral inside the hall. And no candidate will receive advance copies of the questions.

Harvard PhDs

The five columnists will be joined by four Inquirer veterans.

Pangalangan is moderator of the law and politics panel. He was dean of the UP College of Law and a PhD from (and occasional lecturer in) Harvard University.

Bernas, a member of the 1986 Constitutional Commission, is one of the country’s foremost constitutional experts. He has served as president of the Ateneo de Manila and provincial of Philippine Jesuits.

Zamora, a senior reporter of the newspaper, is a multiawarded journalist. She has deep sources in the military and in various politicians’ camps across the political spectrum.

David joined the Inquirer from the Star more than 20 years ago. Her “At Large” column used to appear six times a week; the feminist with deep ties to the late Jaime Cardinal Sin now writes four times a week.

Tan, a pioneering anthropologist and a much-sought-after lecturer in medicine and public health both in the country and abroad, has been writing his “Pinoy Kasi” column for more than a decade.

Pastor and Habito

Pastor was 17 when she first started writing for the Inquirer while still in school. She edits two youth-oriented sections for the newspaper: 2bU and Super. She is one of the most-traveled lifestyle reporters in the country.

Habito, another Harvard PhD, was the economic planning secretary in the first half of the Ramos administration. He writes a much-discussed business column every Monday, and is the founder of an institute based in Ateneo de Manila.

Aruta, who has closely followed the complicated budget process over the years, joined the Inquirer after The Independent in 1988. He has served as Inquirer opinion editor since 1992.

Marcelo, a business journalist for 30 years, is a mentor to many reporters. He has served as Inquirer business editor since 1991.