Reality TV
You have to admit. It was reality TV at its most comic, the protagonists revealing in full color their inevitable links to the entertainment industry. And by the time you read this they will have decided what punishment to mete out private prosecutor Vitaliano Aguirre. Expect the unexpected.
The humor cannot be anything but ironic. The crime is for “contempt of court.” But perhaps it is contempt existing at many levels. Where, as in good poetry, the meanings approach us from many directions, many dimensions. After all, what senator-judge Miriam Santiago was expressing could be nothing less than her feeling of contempt for the panel of prosecutors. It was contempt expressed in no uncertain terms. “Gago!” What can be more contemptuous than that?
And then there was the act of Aguirre covering his ears to what he alleged was Santiago’s shrill voice. The contempt there might ordinarily be arguable, but this being an impeachment court, there must also be a consequent technical-legal reason for why this act constitutes contempt. This fact was quickly validated by the unanimous decision of the court to hold the prosecutor guilty for the crime. The only problem now being what punishment to bring down upon him.
It might have been better for Senate President-judge Juan P. Enrile to have the lawyer there and then detained for an overnight stay at the Senate for his impertinence. But that would have been anti-climactic and would have preempted discussion of possible unusual punishments such as listening to video tapes of Santiago in action for an extended period of time.
Listening to Santiago onscreen for an extended period of time would seem immediately appropriate, almost “Solomonic” in its wisdom. But aren’t we guaranteed safe by the constitution from cruel and unusual punishment? And wouldn’t that qualify as physical and psychological torture? And if it does, isn’t that idea contemptuous of Sen. Miriam D. Santiago? Indeed, shouldn’t the person who suggested that idea be cited for contempt as well? And since it must have been a senator who suggested it, can we now say, the Senate-court has become contemptuous of itself? In which case, shouldn’t the whole panel of senator-judges be held in contempt as well?
In that case, what punishment would be most appropriate? What would be the most wise? You got it. Let’s have everyone review the proceedings of that same day over and over again for an extended period of time.
But why stop there? Judging by what has been written and said about this sordid affair it is clear that the whole country may be moving towards holding the whole impeachment process in contempt of all that seems decent and proper to the normal person. We should all be punished for our contempt. And so also, punished the same way. So why don’t we make a movie of that day and force everyone, every citizen to view? We should have a holiday just for the screening alone.
The problem is, the filmmaker, if he is a good one, might make such good work of that footage, it might actually be entertaining to watch not only by Filipinos but by an international audience as well. Imagine the proceedings of that day edited for consumption via cable or YouTube to a global audience.
Imagine this whole affair as a medium-length entry for a reality TV program like “Don’t Tell My Mother” or “Disorder in the Court.” That would certainly put us once again for better or worse into worldwide attention.
But then there would be a chance the whole world will hold us in contempt for putting the whole practice of democracy into such a comic light. We do understand Westerners do not have the same humor as we have. Imagine if the process of unseating Richard Nixon came to such a comic transition. Oh yes, many jokes are still bandied about after Bill Clinton’s impeachment. But it never came to this. It was never this funny. The Department of Touism slogan hits it right on the head. Indeed, the whole world might now say: “Impeachment. It’s more fun in the Philippines!
