Where do we go from here?

First, a former Bureau of Customs intelligence officer attempted during the joint hearings of the four House committees on dangerous drugs, public order and security, human rights, and public accounts in Bacolor, Pampanga, to link former President Rodrigo Duterte's son-in-law Paolo Duterte, his son-in-law Maneses Carpio, Vice President Sara Duterte's husband, and his alleged Chinese economic adviser Michael Yang to the smuggling of “shabu” worth P11 billion in 2018.

Vice President Sara dismissed the case as mere “political noise.” But the accusation was never refuted and so it remained in force.

Today, two convicted inmates told the same four committees that in 2016, at the Davao Prison and Penal Farm, they killed three Chinese drug convicts on the orders of then-President Rodrigo Duterte. The inmates said they committed the crime in exchange for P1 million in cash (received by their respective wives) and a promise of later release. That promise was not kept.

The commissions have asked the former president to refute these allegations. But there is no indication that he would accept the invitation.

Although the investigation is taking place within the exclusive confines of Congress, very few can argue that it is taking place without the cooperation or consent of Malacañang. This is far too large an initiative for the House leadership to undertake alone. It is worth noting that prior to this investigation, the Duterte camp had attempted to promote a social media post accusing Marcos Jr. of using illegal cocaine before becoming president. Nothing of the sort remains unanswered.

There is always a quid pro quo – it is part of the propaganda exchange.

Today, although the political and personal ties between the Duterte and Marcos camps are severed, neither side has shown any serious willingness to cut all ties between them. Ultimately, they may still want to leave each other a way out in case the Titanic threatens to sink. But for now, the propaganda exchange seems to be in full swing.

It is unclear how much probative value the testimony against the Dutertes has or what Malacañang intends to do with it. The committee hearings, it should be remembered, are mere legislative inquiries “in the service of the law,” not an investigative process aimed at determining probable cause. There may be no plan to indict and prosecute Duterte for the murder of the three Chinese convicts. But there is a real danger that the testimony against him, if formally approved by the four House committees, could force Marcos Jr. to reconsider his decision to shield him from the International Criminal Court (ICC) in The Hague’s request to investigate him for the extrajudicial drug-related killings while he was president.

This is what Duterte wants to avoid the most. Marcos is well aware of this, and regardless of their severed political and personal ties, he probably won’t want to see his predecessor subjected to the ICC process. As president, he knows that it would be extremely damaging to the country and that our people may not be able to recover quickly. Yet, if there were a groundswell of support for his surrender to the ICC, Marcos’ political survival could be at risk if he ignored it altogether. To survive, he might have to accept the ICC process. But an ICC deal would not be easy to strike.

Duterte will not give in like any other African leader who has shown total docility to the process. He will most likely resist. And his resistance, whether passive or active, could tear the country apart. This was already evident when he began talking about the possible secession of Mindanao, the removal of senior military officials from Malacañang, and the establishment of a revolutionary government in place of the current one. Even his closest supporters did not seem ready to entertain any of these ideas.

But we live in a time when our people, burdened by so much poverty, corruption and abuse of power, seem ready to reconsider some of their decisions. Despite survey results that show continued popularity of our leaders, there is a growing sense across all social classes that nothing significant is happening to them; people are impatient for visible and tangible change. So they are making urgent demands that they want the government to respond to squarely today – right now – now rather than in four or six years.

Last Friday at the historic Club Filipino in San Juan, as I reported in this column the same day, Kidapawan Bishop and Caritas Philippines President Colin Bagaforo, San Carlos Bishop, Negros Bishop and Caritas Vice President Gerardo Alminaza, and some highly respected church leaders, together with a wide range of retired high-ranking military officers, a wide range of businessmen and private sector professionals, civil society organizations, women and youth leaders, launched the new multi-sectoral coalition called ANIM (Alyansa ng Nagkakaisang Mamamayan) to push for an end to political dynasties, rampant corruption, and fraudulent and sham automated elections. These are three persistent evils that our people believe are holding us back from rising as a nation and a democracy.

The agenda is modest, but if ANIM can push it forward, we could eventually work on a broader agenda that would ensure the full functioning of our constitutional democracy. We could then welcome with joy the arrival of change and hope in the poorest of our homes and in our national community.

(protected email)