Former Cabinet Secretary Jesus Estanislao Chose Sen. Aquino for the Presidency

Sen. Aquino in Araneta Center during People Power Anniversary

May 3, 2010

Dear John,

You have asked me for some guidance on our forthcoming national elections, taking place exactly one week from today.

So many fears have been expressed, so much has been said, and such mud having been thrown as well. Let me underscore one point through all that we have seen and heard these past several months: that there is a God who ultimately helps us in answer to our prayers and efforts. So, let us always count on the power of prayer.

We must do our part, however. We are called upon to choose the President to whom we entrust the governance of our national affairs. On this very limited point I freely share my thoughts with you.

First and foremost, since we are engaged in a political process, we should not forget that politics is the art of the possible. In politics, our choices are never perfect: there is hardly one single candidate that would perfectly fit all our dreams, our deeply-felt convictions, principles, and the doctrine about life we hold so very dear. Given this perspective, I have narrowed my consideration to only three: Aquino, Villar, and Estrada. They are the ones with the political possibility of winning. Others may be much better; they may even fit better my deeply-held doctrine about life; but I leave them out because in politics we consider only those who can possibly prevail and win.

Second, in choosing between candidates with a great possibility of actually winning, we have to be clear about what we are looking for. Given the immediate past history of our country---specifically the past 12 years---we are privileged to be very clear about one point: that a vacuum of good governance has made it imperative for us to now choose the candidate who is most likely going to pass the tests of good governance. I concede that others may give importance to other tests and considerations, but for me the tests of good governance are what we need to measure the most likely winners in the Presidential race.

Given this perspective, we look at the actual record of the three leading Presidential candidates these past 12 years, and assess it. Which one among these three is most likely to pass the good governance tests, which are the following?

a) Putting country and its interests above personal interests;

b) Sacrificing for the long-term strength of our democratic institutions instead of weakening them;

c) Having the character to face in a balanced manner many (not just one) inter-related issues that we need to confront as a nation;

d) Having a strategy for moving our economy and society forward with citizen participation and meaningful involvement of all sectors at all levels of society.

There is no need to apply these tests to Estrada. The record of a convicted criminal removes him from any further consideration.

The campaign these past months has been revealing about Villar. Given his record, how likely is he to put the country’s interests above his won? How likely is he to restrain himself to strengthen our institutions (e.g. the SEC, the PSE, etc.)? Has he shown enough character to face his colleagues in the Senate to answer documented charges against him? Beyond the slogans of eliminating poverty, what strategy for the economy has he put forward other than a return to the protectionism of old?

I have applied the four tests to Aquino, and frankly I am most comfortable with his decency to put country above self, his continuing willingness to sacrifice for our democratic institutions, and with his character. He is obviously not as smart as the other candidates, but we have had so many over-smart Presidents, and look at where they had led us. For as long as he is willing to surround himself with good people, and he actually listens to them, then he passes also the fourth test, perhaps the best among the three.

Third, how may I hold on to my choice of Aquino in the face of the RH Bill test that the Catholic Church has asked Catholic voters to use? On the face of it, Villar passes this test: he claims he is pro-life and he has signed a covenant in the Manila Cathedral to take a pro-life stance. Aquino’s stance is more nuanced and less pleasing to the pro-life advocates, among whom I count myself.

The RH Bill in its present form is coercive and shows no respect for the conscience of Catholics who wish to remain faithful to the teachings of their Church. Aquino has already said he is against coercion, and he would be respectful of the conscience of those with pro-life principles and doctrine. Unlike a pro-life President, he would not allow his Secretary of Health to be distributing condoms to the general public during Holy Week! It is not true that Aquino is in favor of the RH Bill in its current coercive form. His stand on this issue is not hopelessly out of bounds, certainly not way beyond the pale of redemption.

Indeed, unfortunate as this is for pro-life advocates, his stand on the RH bill is in line with what many Filipinos think of the issue. It shows up the gap between Catholic doctrine and prevailing secular opinion. Pro-life advocates should take it as a challenge to narrow and eventually close that gap, by doing more outreach and doctrinal teach-ins. Rather than bashing the head of a candidate on this single issue, and removing him from any consideration whatsoever, pro-life advocates should be more resolute about carrying on and making their advocacy much more effective. Instead of taking it out on Aquino, we should look at ourselves for having failed to carry out a more effective advocacy in favor of life and the doctrine of the Church on human sexuality and reproduction.

Finally, and in conclusion, I get back to the third governance test, which leads us to demand of candidates a character to face up to many (not just one) inter-related issues in a balanced manner. What this asks us is to look at the character of the candidate; but what it also asks us is not to focus only one issue alone, e.g. the RH Bill.

John, these past 12 years our country has suffered from a “good governance” vacuum. Let us fill it by choosing a “governance President”. Of the three we have on offer---given that politics is the art of the possible---we have Aquino as the one who offers us our best (mind you, not perfect) hope.

Jesus P. Estanislao