The
first time I heard about Ping Lacson was when he led the team
which rescued Robina Gokongwei, kidnapped daughter of taipan
John Gokongwei. I was struck by stories that he refused to
accept a monetary reward from Mr. Gokongwei. As a researcher
on the subject of corruption, I thought Ping was unusual in
a society where monetary rewards for doing one’s duty
is considered socially acceptable even if it is not necessarily
legal.
The
next time I heard about him was in Dumaguete. In 1989, people
were talking about his exploits as Commanding Officer of the
Cebu Metropolitan District Command. Ping rescued the youngest
child and only son of a Chinese business couple. Again, he
refused a munificent cash reward. The story goes that the
father, in his joy over his son’s safe return, offered
him the huge ransom money which was originally raised for
the kidnappers. To his surprise, Ping refused. The parents
of the child who is now a young man continue to tell this
story about an outstanding public officer who refused to accept
a reward.
Ping
captured national attention when he became PNP Chief in 1999.
The public was enthralled with images showing how he reduced
the waistlines and bellies of policemen. What is not very
well known is that he improved police efficiency by downloading
85% of PNP’s logistics to town and city police stations.
He eradicated the “kotong” culture among policemen
and earned the loyalty of jeepney, taxi, bus and delivery
truck drivers. He instituted the “No-Take” policy
and instilled discipline in the national police force.
I
met Ping in 2003. He was already a senator and was originally
favored as the opposition candidate. I was requested to join
former cabinet members briefing him on the different areas
of public governance. He was then preparing his program of
action. I was reluctant to give the briefing. At that time,
gruesome stories on human rights abuses and narco-politics
were being circulated about him.
It
is the practice of presidentiables to request briefings from
professionals, I had the opportunity to brief three of them.
To
my surprise, Ping showed serious interest in my favorite subject:
fiscal policy and the Philippine debt problem. By the time
he decided to proceed with his candidacy, Ping had a full
blown program covering the entire range of the public administration
system. Typically, Ping advocated platforms which were considered
politically risky at that time. He proposed alternative solutions
to public borrowing and boldly supported population management.
His
current record in the Senate as a crusader against corruption
is well known. He initiated many investigations, the best
known of which are the ones on Jose Pidal, bribery in the
failed impeachment bid of GMA, overpricing of lamp posts in
the ASEAN Summit, and the Quedancor swine program.
Ping
was active in the ZTE investigations involving Jun Lozada
and the Joc-Joc Bolante fertilizer scam.
He
has consistently refused to accept P200 million in pork barrel
even as he was laughed at for refusing to accept what is considered
a legitimate entitlement.
This
is the man who will not be president.
Patas
na laban?
All
over the country, there are hundreds, nay, thousands of qualified
candidates who will not be barangay captains, mayors, governors,
congressmen, senators, vice-presidents and presidents precisely
because they cannot mobilize the huge funding requirements
of an electoral campaign.
Campaign
finance comes largely from big business. It does not come
free. When asked about his links to a big businessman, the
youngest candidate was quoted, “As(k) any candidate
declared or undeclared, do you think they are not asking for
their (businessmen’s) help? Do you think they won’t
accept if they’re offered help? Do you think they would
not be grateful if they receive help?”
Okay.
This business of being grateful. What form will this take
later? Is the matter of choosing presidents a question of
who is one’s businessman? Will elections be reduced
to selecting which businessman to rule the country?
Is
there hope for patas na laban? I can see two, albeit faint
rays of hope. One is regulation of election spending. We have
a law which is ignored, the way we ignore the law on the national
anthem. We cannot expect the government functionaries to implement
it. The initiative has to come from the public and from the
citizens themselves. Civil society organizations are already
monitoring election spending.
Another
way is for politicians to mobilize funding from the public.
Obama has shown the way. Citizens must be encouraged to fund
the candidates they want. This has happened in barangays,
municipalities and even provinces. It must happen more often.
It should happen at the national level.
Only
then will we finally have patas na laban.
